Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
Maybe the Dems should run ads about how Repubs are eating the children of the people who live there? Or maybe accuse repubs of running child sex trafficking rings out of the mega churches? It’d be a start. Maybe get control of the house and run investigative hearings on Matt Getts Off fucking kids? Who needs policy proposals? Not the stupid.
Give us your top three dem headlines that’ll sway those “indies” and center repubs?
MAGA is playing chess and the Dems are playing pick-up sticks when it come to reaching people with (dis)information. That's why Trump won 2 of 3 and would have won the second without Covid.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
Stop nominating women? I mean good on us for 2016, but I guess we had a good run. 🤷♂️
1993: 11/22 Little Rock
1996; 9/28 New York
1997: 11/14 Oakland, 11/15 Oakland
1998: 7/5 Dallas, 7/7 Albuquerque, 7/8 Phoenix, 7/10 San Diego, 7/11 Las Vegas
2000: 10/17 Dallas
2003: 4/3 OKC
2012: 11/17 Tulsa(EV), 11/18 Tulsa(EV)
2013: 11/16 OKC
2014: 10/8 Tulsa 2022: 9/20 OKC 2023: 9/13 Ft Worth, 9/15 Ft Worth
Maybe you forgot Hillary and Harris were the ones that lost the general.
My reply was to the stopping the nomination of women comment:
Hillary was nominated by voters in the Democratic primary for 2016.
Other times, fellow Democrats voters chose to vote for men in Democratic primaries.
I don't even know what you're trying to explain. I was making a sarcastic comment that since we're acting like it's the end of the world after we lost one election, and Lex is calling out that we lost 2/3, that the problem was nominating women. It was tongue in cheek.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
You were downplaying trumps victory. That smells like dem spirit. Grounded in a reality they don’t fare too well in. With a decent economic record, they were completely shut out of all branches of leadership by voters. I wouldn’t downplay that result.
Men winning elections is an unfortunate reality in this country. I don’t support that bias, but if it were my job to win elections, I’d sure as sh!t take notice of it. And 2020 basement campaigning wasn’t the most bizarre of political rallies ever? Since we are criticizing posters here, not recognizing that is extremely ungrounded.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
some like to cherry pick. yes, in any given 12-16 year cycle, there is going to be two/three winners from one party and one/two winner from another. that cycle will continue. Go back one presidency, using your model, and dems are up 3-1. I guess 4 years ago we'd be saying that "republicans need to begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play"? Absurd.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
You were downplaying trumps victory. That smells like dem spirit. Grounded in a reality they don’t fare too well in. With a decent economic record, they were completely shut out of all branches of leadership by voters. I wouldn’t downplay that result.
Men winning elections is an unfortunate reality in this country. I don’t support that bias, but if it were my job to win elections, I’d sure as sh!t take notice of it. And 2020 basement campaigning wasn’t the most bizarre of political rallies ever? Since we are criticizing posters here, not recognizing that is extremely ungrounded.
Downplaying? No, I'm saying Dems lost one election in a row which is empirically true. They lost the one before but won two previous, prior to losing two previous. Do you not remember in 2021 when everyone said Trump was dead, DeSantis was the future, even Fox? Shit changes. Everything looks bleak in the media until it doesn't. I don't see you commenting on the Dems winning back both the House and Senate in PA last night. The senate win was a major upset
Oh and here's the sub-lede from Fox: The House race is the fifth straight special election that Democrats have won so far in 2025, despite the party performing dismally in public opinion polling since losing control of the White House and Senate, and failing to win back the House majority in the 2024 elections.
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
when trump gave his explanation for making fun of that reporter with that muscular condition, did we all take him at his word?
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
when trump gave his explanation for making fun of that reporter with that muscular condition, did we all take him at his word?
COOTWH doesn’t have a history of telling the truth, telling an average of 8-12 lies or mistruths per day for every day of his first term. It’s reasonable to dismiss his explanation or excuse. For the congresswoman, I don’t know her history of veracity. Regardless, if you’re going to call it out, call it out on both sides. That doesn’t happen but folks always blame Dems for taking the low road. Repubs have been normalized as low road hoarders with impunity.
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
when trump gave his explanation for making fun of that reporter with that muscular condition, did we all take him at his word?
COOTWH doesn’t have a history of telling the truth, telling an average of 8-12 lies or mistruths per day for every day of his first term. It’s reasonable to dismiss his explanation or excuse. For the congresswoman, I don’t know her history of veracity. Regardless, if you’re going to call it out, call it out on both sides. That doesn’t happen but folks always blame Dems for taking the low road. Repubs have been normalized as low road hoarders with impunity.
fine, trump's a bad example. I'm saying if all things were equal, a "normal" GOP Senator. You'd likely dismiss it as BS.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
when trump gave his explanation for making fun of that reporter with that muscular condition, did we all take him at his word?
COOTWH doesn’t have a history of telling the truth, telling an average of 8-12 lies or mistruths per day for every day of his first term. It’s reasonable to dismiss his explanation or excuse. For the congresswoman, I don’t know her history of veracity. Regardless, if you’re going to call it out, call it out on both sides. That doesn’t happen but folks always blame Dems for taking the low road. Repubs have been normalized as low road hoarders with impunity.
fine, trump's a bad example. I'm saying if all things were equal, a "normal" GOP Senator. You'd likely dismiss it as BS.
It’s BS on both sides but only one side bears the burden of the BS.
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
Let’s just say I personally wouldn’t scream racism because someone said “pimp cane”, and I don’t think ableism is at the root of this. They both said stupid shit. Neither quote is news worthy, imo. Just more clickbait to rile people up. Thanks for pointing out the color of everyone’s skin who was involved, though. Super helpful, it’s a good example of how persuasive that tactic can be to those with preconceived notions that every unfavorable outcome for people of color is due to racism. Headlines are really good at that too. Click, click.
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
Let’s just say I personally wouldn’t scream racism because someone said “pimp cane”, and I don’t think ableism is at the root of this. They both said stupid shit. Neither quote is news worthy, imo. Just more clickbait to rile people up. Thanks for pointing out the color of everyone’s skin who was involved, though. Super helpful, it’s a good example of how persuasive that tactic can be to those with preconceived notions that every unfavorable outcome for people of color is due to racism. Headlines are really good at that too. Click, click.
Like racism doesn’t exist and DEI was unneeded. What year were you figuring you’d be replaced?
Guess I’m not the only one pointing out folks’ skin color. From Letter From An American:
Hegseth publicly suggested that Brown had been appointed because he is Black. “Was it because of his skin color? Or his skill? We’ll never know, but always doubt,” Hegseth wrote.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
You were downplaying trumps victory. That smells like dem spirit. Grounded in a reality they don’t fare too well in. With a decent economic record, they were completely shut out of all branches of leadership by voters. I wouldn’t downplay that result.
Men winning elections is an unfortunate reality in this country. I don’t support that bias, but if it were my job to win elections, I’d sure as sh!t take notice of it. And 2020 basement campaigning wasn’t the most bizarre of political rallies ever? Since we are criticizing posters here, not recognizing that is extremely ungrounded.
Downplaying? No, I'm saying Dems lost one election in a row which is empirically true. They lost the one before but won two previous, prior to losing two previous. Do you not remember in 2021 when everyone said Trump was dead, DeSantis was the future, even Fox? Shit changes. Everything looks bleak in the media until it doesn't. I don't see you commenting on the Dems winning back both the House and Senate in PA last night. The senate win was a major upset
Oh and here's the sub-lede from Fox: The House race is the fifth straight special election that Democrats have won so far in 2025, despite the party performing dismally in public opinion polling since losing control of the White House and Senate, and failing to win back the House majority in the 2024 elections.
Sure that state senate win was terrific but did any media outlets report the turnout? Probably about half of what the last vote total was. If the last election was around 50% then this turnout was about 25%. MAGA has turned the tables on Dems, now they only win elections with low turnout. Maybe. But none is talking turnout in these upset elections.
Who gives a fuck what one congress member said about the TX governor? What a waste of time.
Some, apparently.
Clearly. Here is how you prefaced an article you shared a couple weeks ago, you know, the one about a member of congress saying stupid shit about a TX congressman:
"Yup, unapologetic racists are members of the US congress. Nothing has changed."
Any issue with adding unapologetic ableists to the list of traits congress possesses? Since you seemingly do give a fuck about clickbait news. Well, as long as it doesn't involve casting team blue in a negative light, that is. Just another byproduct of our super-awesome duopoly. Go team!
Chimp graphic is cool. Do you disagree with the bold?
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
Let’s just say I personally wouldn’t scream racism because someone said “pimp cane”, and I don’t think ableism is at the root of this. They both said stupid shit. Neither quote is news worthy, imo. Just more clickbait to rile people up. Thanks for pointing out the color of everyone’s skin who was involved, though. Super helpful, it’s a good example of how persuasive that tactic can be to those with preconceived notions that every unfavorable outcome for people of color is due to racism. Headlines are really good at that too. Click, click.
Like racism doesn’t exist and DEI was unneeded. What year were you figuring you’d be replaced?
For many DEI is about removing qualified people from their jobs without cause, lying about their skills on the way out, and appointing DEI people to fill these positions. Fantastic cause you got there.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
You were downplaying trumps victory. That smells like dem spirit. Grounded in a reality they don’t fare too well in. With a decent economic record, they were completely shut out of all branches of leadership by voters. I wouldn’t downplay that result.
Men winning elections is an unfortunate reality in this country. I don’t support that bias, but if it were my job to win elections, I’d sure as sh!t take notice of it. And 2020 basement campaigning wasn’t the most bizarre of political rallies ever? Since we are criticizing posters here, not recognizing that is extremely ungrounded.
Downplaying? No, I'm saying Dems lost one election in a row which is empirically true. They lost the one before but won two previous, prior to losing two previous. Do you not remember in 2021 when everyone said Trump was dead, DeSantis was the future, even Fox? Shit changes. Everything looks bleak in the media until it doesn't. I don't see you commenting on the Dems winning back both the House and Senate in PA last night. The senate win was a major upset
Oh and here's the sub-lede from Fox: The House race is the fifth straight special election that Democrats have won so far in 2025, despite the party performing dismally in public opinion polling since losing control of the White House and Senate, and failing to win back the House majority in the 2024 elections.
Sure that state senate win was terrific but did any media outlets report the turnout? Probably about half of what the last vote total was. If the last election was around 50% then this turnout was about 25%. MAGA has turned the tables on Dems, now they only win elections with low turnout. Maybe. But none is talking turnout in these upset elections.
Trump drives turnout. That era is gone. He will be on no more ballots short of a Constitutional Amendment, which isn't happening. So asking how the turnout compared to November, a general election, is a ridiculous question. Special elections and not even mid terms compare to general elections. So if you're just going to boo-hoo and be negative until 2028 because your answer is "how did that compare to the last election", then you're going to be a real fucking drag around here. Rather than focusing on the actual impact of the election, in this case having the D's control both branches in PA.
Unfortunately for the dems, the Rs are masters at turning presidential elections into circus like culture wars, and then are masters at winning the argument and making dem mantra look foolish. We were all around last fall?
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
they've lost exactly one election in a row. Give it a rest.
0.333 BA against trump, who probably would have coasted in 2020 had Covid not turned the election into a bizarre campaign from home for “Sleepy Joe.”
Maybe we need to stop nominating women? You should run with that one. Maybe that's the problem.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
You were downplaying trumps victory. That smells like dem spirit. Grounded in a reality they don’t fare too well in. With a decent economic record, they were completely shut out of all branches of leadership by voters. I wouldn’t downplay that result.
Men winning elections is an unfortunate reality in this country. I don’t support that bias, but if it were my job to win elections, I’d sure as sh!t take notice of it. And 2020 basement campaigning wasn’t the most bizarre of political rallies ever? Since we are criticizing posters here, not recognizing that is extremely ungrounded.
Downplaying? No, I'm saying Dems lost one election in a row which is empirically true. They lost the one before but won two previous, prior to losing two previous. Do you not remember in 2021 when everyone said Trump was dead, DeSantis was the future, even Fox? Shit changes. Everything looks bleak in the media until it doesn't. I don't see you commenting on the Dems winning back both the House and Senate in PA last night. The senate win was a major upset
Oh and here's the sub-lede from Fox: The House race is the fifth straight special election that Democrats have won so far in 2025, despite the party performing dismally in public opinion polling since losing control of the White House and Senate, and failing to win back the House majority in the 2024 elections.
Sure that state senate win was terrific but did any media outlets report the turnout? Probably about half of what the last vote total was. If the last election was around 50% then this turnout was about 25%. MAGA has turned the tables on Dems, now they only win elections with low turnout. Maybe. But none is talking turnout in these upset elections.
Trump drives turnout. That era is gone. He will be on no more ballots short of a Constitutional Amendment, which isn't happening. So asking how the turnout compared to November, a general election, is a ridiculous question. Special elections and not even mid terms compare to general elections. So if you're just going to boo-hoo and be negative until 2028 because your answer is "how did that compare to the last election", then you're going to be a real fucking drag around here. Rather than focusing on the actual impact of the election, in this case having the D's control both branches in PA.
Turnout is always essential in any post election analysis, especially special elections. The next major election is next November, which I hope democrats can retake the house. The US senate may be gone for a long time, due to the key losses of three red state senators, which helped the Dems for a long time.
When I think of PA elections…I see the big picture, to many analysts, they see PA as a potential big problem. They say it’s becoming very similar to Ohio.
I question Democratic Party norms for good reason. They have been losing ground in states sorely needed and will lose close to ten electoral votes/ House seats in the next census and their answer is to rally around AOC / Bernie…IIRC, politicians we both saw as problematic for Dems five years ago
Comments
either dems begin to understand how the game is won, or let someone else play.
I didn't realize Trump was going to run in every election forevermore. Now that I know that, I am concerned. But keep talking about what "would have" happened. You have become really good at ungrounded statements.
Give us your top three dem headlines that’ll sway those “indies” and center repubs?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
1996; 9/28 New York
1997: 11/14 Oakland, 11/15 Oakland
1998: 7/5 Dallas, 7/7 Albuquerque, 7/8 Phoenix, 7/10 San Diego, 7/11 Las Vegas
2000: 10/17 Dallas
2003: 4/3 OKC
2012: 11/17 Tulsa(EV), 11/18 Tulsa(EV)
2013: 11/16 OKC
2014: 10/8 Tulsa
2022: 9/20 OKC
2023: 9/13 Ft Worth, 9/15 Ft Worth
Hillary was nominated by voters in the Democratic primary for 2016.
Other times, fellow Democrats voters chose to vote for men in Democratic primaries.
1996; 9/28 New York
1997: 11/14 Oakland, 11/15 Oakland
1998: 7/5 Dallas, 7/7 Albuquerque, 7/8 Phoenix, 7/10 San Diego, 7/11 Las Vegas
2000: 10/17 Dallas
2003: 4/3 OKC
2012: 11/17 Tulsa(EV), 11/18 Tulsa(EV)
2013: 11/16 OKC
2014: 10/8 Tulsa
2022: 9/20 OKC
2023: 9/13 Ft Worth, 9/15 Ft Worth
Stop nominating women? You mean after that one time?
1996; 9/28 New York
1997: 11/14 Oakland, 11/15 Oakland
1998: 7/5 Dallas, 7/7 Albuquerque, 7/8 Phoenix, 7/10 San Diego, 7/11 Las Vegas
2000: 10/17 Dallas
2003: 4/3 OKC
2012: 11/17 Tulsa(EV), 11/18 Tulsa(EV)
2013: 11/16 OKC
2014: 10/8 Tulsa
2022: 9/20 OKC
2023: 9/13 Ft Worth, 9/15 Ft Worth
You were downplaying trumps victory. That smells like dem spirit. Grounded in a reality they don’t fare too well in. With a decent economic record, they were completely shut out of all branches of leadership by voters. I wouldn’t downplay that result.
https://apnews.com/article/pennsylvania-democratic-party-donald-trump-election-094e907bd9af0d55a3ac76bb5e22d17c
Oh and here's the sub-lede from Fox: The House race is the fifth straight special election that Democrats have won so far in 2025, despite the party performing dismally in public opinion polling since losing control of the White House and Senate, and failing to win back the House majority in the 2024 elections.
The point I was making is that Lorena Bobbitt wasn’t censured for her previous behaviour on the floor of the house nor her pimp comments. Nor was there faux rage exhibited. Then she doubled down on her pimp comments and the black congressman was censured and it was crickets on here. Fast forward to another black Congress person making degrading statements, which gets attention, and when she further clarifies her statement, it’s pointed out as if making a “see, both sides” comparison.
Only one side is held accountable or generates the faux rage. Glad you’re able to normalize it as clickbait and that my point was lost on you.
Happy days are here again!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Let’s just say I personally wouldn’t scream racism because someone said “pimp cane”, and I don’t think ableism is at the root of this. They both said stupid shit. Neither quote is news worthy, imo. Just more clickbait to rile people up. Thanks for pointing out the color of everyone’s skin who was involved, though. Super helpful, it’s a good example of how persuasive that tactic can be to those with preconceived notions that every unfavorable outcome for people of color is due to racism. Headlines are really good at that too. Click, click.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Hegseth publicly suggested that Brown had been appointed because he is Black. “Was it because of his skin color? Or his skill? We’ll never know, but always doubt,” Hegseth wrote.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
When I think of PA elections…I see the big picture, to many analysts, they see PA as a potential big problem. They say it’s becoming very similar to Ohio.
I question Democratic Party norms for good reason. They have been losing ground in states sorely needed and will lose close to ten electoral votes/ House seats in the next census and their answer is to rally around AOC / Bernie…IIRC, politicians we both saw as problematic for Dems five years ago