‘Party is Completely Broken’: Poll Reveals AOC Approval

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) claimed Ocasio-Cortez is the party's leader, predicting her ability to win a primary against Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

AOC in the minority party of the Senate is not a solution to the nation's problems.  Eye on the prize - regain control of the White House.

a Siena College poll from April 2025 shows Ocasio-Cortez with a 47% favorable and 33% unfavorable rating among New York voters.

So she could be governor of NY easily. 

Again "eye on the prize"

You're right. AOC is smart and photogenic... but she has been too deeply slimed by the fascists. She must remain a spokesperson from a safe district. Senate or House, no matter.

AOC is much more serious and viable than MTG anytime.

(Since we're doing that initial thingy).

"This week, we heard Democrats shout:

Shut down the city,

We are at war, Fight in the streets,

Their party is completely broken. They have no vision and no leader. All they have is relentless opposition to President Trump."

Rhetoric is not a party platform, and this type of rhetoric invigorates the Trump supporters just a much as his opposition.

Democrats have spent the last several years vacillating between being anti-Trump or just trying to outdo each other in the contest to be the most progressive/woke person in the room. What they need to be doing is focus on the basics that everyone needs. Jobs, healthcare, transportation, clean water and air, low crime, housing, energy.

Instead, they mostly just come off as hysterical to much of the population.

It should be easy to defeat Republicans. They put so much energy into worrying about the private lives of people or attacking people on the margins of society. For years, they’ve been on a mission to basically shut down the government. Trump is hardly the first to talk about all the government agencies he wants to close. It’s a fetish. They don’t even know what these agencies do. They just want to close stuff for the sake of closing it.

I complain a lot about Trump not delivering the beautiful healthcare plan he has been promising for years, but the truth is Democrats haven’t done much much better since Obama’s efforts.

When they do address real problems, so many of their solutions are just dumb. “Defund the Police” was dumb. “Reform the Police” would actually be smart. “Hold Police Accountable” would be smart. Defund makes you sound crazy, like crime is irrelevant.

Jacking up the minimum wage to $15, $20, and now in California, they’re talking about $30 in some sectors. That’s insane. Instead, maybe limit CEO compensation, tie it to employee compensation, or just make them pay more taxes. Super high minimum wage forces small businesses to reduce services or close altogether.

Forgive student loans? Why? Are you also going to forgive credit card debt? Car loans? Mortgages? Business loans? What’s so special about people who chose to go to colleges they knew they couldn’t afford? 

I could go on, but Democrats need to be better than woke or anti-Trump. They need to look like they know how to get important shit done.

When they do address real problems, so many of their solutions are just dumb. “Defund the Police” was dumb. “Reform the Police” would actually be smart. “Hold Police Accountable” would be smart. Defund makes you sound crazy, like crime is irrelevant.

A good point!

Forgive student loans? Why? Are you also going to forgive credit card debt? Car loans? Mortgages? Business loans? What’s so special about people who chose to go to colleges they knew they couldn’t afford? 

A better strategy in my view would be to make college affordable, eliminate the college debt in return for 2 years of service in the military or some other area of public service

Democrats have spent the last several years vacillating between being anti-Trump or just trying to outdo each other in the contest to be the most progressive/woke person in the room. What they need to be doing is focus on the basics that everyone needs. Jobs, healthcare, transportation, clean water and air, low crime, housing, energy.

Again I agree with this point

Begrudgingly, I agree with both you and Tacos! It is time for the democratic party to return to brass-tack" politics as Trump's MAGAites have demonstrated they know how to message a political point of view. . . and apparently our society is not too keen on 'everything all at once" politics. . .even from republicans! Slow down, democrats. . . the so-called, "socialist" label is sticking to the party like glue. And frankly, the country as a whole is not so liberal as to wish to be progressive. Stick to basis and remove the 'dictator' clawing to stay in the limelight and be admired once he moves on (somewhere or another). 

It is time for the democratic party to return to brass-tack" politics

Exactly - and looking back to other elections, we know they are capable of doing it

the so-called, "socialist" label is sticking to the party like glue. And frankly, the country as a whole is not so liberal as to wish to be progressive. 

agree

So, if your taxes go towards paying for a police force, firefighters and paramedics, you live in a socialist community.

Funny how some folk don't understand what the S word actually means. 

So, if your taxes go towards paying for a police force, firefighters and paramedics, you live in a socialist community. Funny how some folk don't understand what the S word actually means. 

No idea where this came from?

What's your point in relation to this discussion?  this article?  this topic?

A better strategy in my view would be to make college affordable, eliminate the college debt in return for 2 years of service in the military or some other area of public service

I like that idea. And that would have been great for me back in '87 when I joined the Air Force with that BS degree under my belt. Still wouldn't have been an officer but the loans would have been paid

So, if your taxes go towards paying for a police force, firefighters and paramedics, you live in a socialist community. Funny how some folk don't understand what the S word actually means. 

Fantastic use of irony.  Well done.

No idea where this came from?

Page 41 of "The Handbook for Misrepresenting Socialism"

Are you also going to forgive credit card debt? 

Credit Card companies make deals to change interests rates and reduce debt every day, hell, it's a separate industry.

Car loans? Mortgages? Business loans?

Happens every day in Bankruptcy Courts across the country.

There is no reason for Student loans not to be dischargeable in Bankruptcy like any other loan...none.

I’m all for renegotiating terms. But outright forgiving the debt seems unjustified.

Earned a free ride through college then broke my back. 

Whether I paid it back or not then became a question.

Ended up with a free ride piling it higher and deeper.

That was decades ago and have yet to receive a bill.

Agreed, but

As of the third quarter of 2024,   42.2 million Americans hold federal student loan debt , with a total national balance of over $1.6 trillion ¹ .  In other words, about   16% of U.S. adults currently have federal student loan debt ² .  The number of student loan borrowers has slightly decreased since 2022 ² .

So 16% of American adults have little to no chance of buying a home indefinitely unless they find a spouse/partner with a good FICO score and a job good enough to get a mortgage. 

Not renegotiating or not forgiving is holding back the economy. 

The trade offs have to be measured and ameliorated.  

There is no reason for Student loans not to be dischargeable in Bankruptcy like any other loan...none.

Wholeheartedly disagree. So someone decides to go to college with NO intention of paying back the monies lent. It sounds as though you may be of the 'free higher learning for everyone' mindset. just knowing they can get away ewith it in a few years is really not good incentive. Especially in no demand for what they studied areas. We, collectively, have bred this attitude with the 'you won't go anywhere without a college education' which is total bullshit.

The whole system is a mess. The loans are federally guaranteed so the colleges charge what they like and know they are going to get it. Then they go on a hiring spree, tripling administration. Also, a building spree, throwing up new construction whether they need it or not. All the while, all they have to do is increase tuition. All of that needs to change.

Not renegotiating or not forgiving is holding back the economy.

Yeah, probably. At least a little. I'm for renegotiation. As a person, I would forgive the loan, if I could. But as government policy, that decision impacts others. It means the government has to spend less on something else (like healthcare), or increase taxes. Maybe that something they were going to spend on is pretty important to the people receiving it. And I know most of us don't want to pay more in taxes. That hurts the economy, too.

We are heading for a potentially whopping 30% increase to the most bloated military budget in the world

unless the Senate can find enough adults to stop it.

Wholeheartedly disagree.

Repectfully, so what?

So someone decides to go to college with NO intention of paying back the monies lent.

Line them up and ask them if they had no intention to repay the load, that is total bullshit.

It sounds as though you may be of the 'free higher learning for everyone' mindset.

It sounds like your interpretive skills need polishing.

just knowing they can get away ewith it in a few years is really not good incentive.

Who?  18 year olds are eight years away from maturity. They just aren't as insidious as you seem to believe.

Especially in no demand for what they studied areas.

That is easily fixed.

We, collectively, have bred this attitude with the 'you won't go anywhere without a college education' which is total bullshit.

on that we can agree, but here we are.

Line them up and ask them if they had no intention to repay the loan, that is total bullshit.

Let's be honest, the image conservatives have in their minds when they fantasize about someone intentionally getting a free college education isn't a young white religious conservative going to bible college that they couldn't possibly imagine trying to get a free ride by lying on a loan application. No, what they're imagining is some minority that they think snuck into this country or grew up in some ghetto and thus wouldn't think twice about trying to cheat the system and use the tax dollars they imagine were earned by the blood sweat and tears of middle-class white conservative Christians slaving away every day at a dead end labor job because they didn't go to college.

The loans are federally guaranteed so the colleges charge what they like and know they are going to get it.

This is the crux of the problem

FHA loans are federally guaranteed.  That doesn't mean you can buy a $4million mansion with one.  They also don't let you borrow more than you're going to reasonably be able to pay back.  

The entire student loan system actively eschews any form of financial responsibility on the part of either lender or borrower.  

I'm for renegotiation.

It wouldn't be difficult.

So 16% of American adults have little to no chance of buying a home indefinitely unless they find a spouse/partner with a good FICO score and a job good enough to get a mortgage. 

So.... the people who don't have loans because they didn't go to college but still can't afford to buy a house.... they just don't exist?  

So eliminate the federal guarantee?

No 18 year old would  be eligible, so no new loans.

Most parents wouldn't be eligible either.

Problem solved.

Fewer poor people get educated and the old imbalance problems come back?

but still can't afford to buy a house.... they just don't exist?  

Of course they exist.  Why can't they afford a house when they buy $60,000 pick up trucks?  /s

What properly need 'discovery' is why college tuition and government loans attract tuition hikes. That is, what office is it exactly or what mechanism in the loan structure that prompts colleges and universities to excesses. . . and remove or forbid that step. By definition: It is instances of fraud, waste, and abuse.

Frankly, educators and government officials should never have allowed the 'abuse' as incentive to occur in the first place. Furthermore, once they saw that students were not receiving 'deliverance' of any kind from the cost excesses and "stresses" they should have ratcheted back many years ago. 

These are their children being exploited by excess costs for education. Even a fool can see this is no way to treat the 'fruit' of this nation.

We, collectively, have bred this attitude with the 'you won't go anywhere without a college education' which is total bullshit.

Also, the education cost is suspect as to just how far a person can go (with it) hanging about their neck and shoulders. I find it disturbing that one who can complain about paying back the 'inflated' cost of a degree, would reckon that a cost solution would be to work in trade or vocation instead rather than just lowering the cost and keeping it relatively down. Why should only the 'elites' born into wealth be the intellectuals in our country, when clearly the problem is not intellectual deficiency (or a lack of capable intelligence) but a lack of economic funding.

So eliminate the federal guarantee?

Not necessarily.  But you could definitely put some common sense restrictions in place. We're loaning kids $300k to become elementary school teachers and social workers.  I'm not sure who's dumber, the lender or the borrower. 

No 18 year old would  be eligible, so no new loans.

Most parents wouldn't be eligible either.

Problem solved.

Just because you can't think of a decent plan doesn't mean there isn't one.  If you want people to continue in the pain of student loan debt, then the very best plan is to continue being as irresponsible as we have been.  Full speed ahead.

Or.... or..... maybe we could make colleges stop taking advantage of stupid kids.  You want to see education get less expensive?  Reduce the maximum loan amount.  

Or maybe we don't offer student loans to freshmen or sophomores.  If you can't afford a 4 yr school and they won't offer you a scholarship, there is an affordable community college nearby.  Between Pell Grants and other tax credits, you can do the first two years almost free.  Additionally, you can figure out if college is really for you.

How about we have a minimum GPA and SAT score for a student loan?  No sense in you borrowing six figures for useless, nonsense degree the university had to create because you're not smart enough to get a real one.

That doesn't even address amortization schedules, which are the same ones we used since the Johnson Administration when you could get 4 years for $1000.

There are all kinds of things we can do to get this under control.  

Fewer poor people get educated and the old imbalance problems come back?

I'm not sure where you've been that the imbalance problems went away. 

Loaning kids money doesn't solve economic imbalance.  A stupidly large loan doesn't gloss over the fact that poor kids learn fuck all in school leading up to college, so they have virtually no chance of closing the gap once they get there.  Meanwhile, the same institutions that do little more than provide childcare have been telling these kids that high paying blue collar jobs are beneath them. 

You don't need a student loan to become an electrician, plumber, HVAC tech, aircraft mechanic or dozens of other very good jobs.  Maybe we stop discouraging those.

Fewer poor people get educated and the old imbalance problems come back?

Why not provide four years of education at a public college (Harvard, Yale etc you are on your own) in exchange for two years of public services - in the military, the peace corps, national park service, etc.

Kids would have work experience and a chance to save some money before they begin the college experience

We, collectively, have bred this attitude with the 'you won't go anywhere without a college education' which is total bullshit.

Exactly, we have a vocation high school / trade school in our country that year after years turns out hundreds of students into the trades - carpentry, electricians, beauty specialist, LPN's, mechanics. etc etc

These young people hit the ground running with a good job, good pay and benefits while others are getting degrees in ancient Greek literature or behavioral habits of jungle animals only to be amazed that there are few jobs for such skills.

We, collectively, have bred this attitude with the 'you won't go anywhere without a college education' which is total bullshit.

4.2.4 is Just Jim's quote (above).

Robert, your point is valid (same with JJ's), but the dilemma has never been trade schools, because they exist. The dilemma is not even type of career/life path, because we need people in all spheres of study. The problem is the cost of higher education and what is being offered peripherally as incentives to get that education. The cost is too high, in and of itself (and continuingly escalating). 

Higher education cost is something 'elites' need to manage or 'halt' as a group.

These young people hit the ground running with a good job, good pay and benefits while others are getting degrees in ancient Greek literature or behavioral habits of jungle animals only to be amazed that there are few jobs for such skills.

The point isn't to learn Greek basket weaving and go out and find a job making Greek baskets.  College is supposed to teach critical thinking that can be applied to just about any problem in any industry.  College is also an excellent deflection to redirect the testosterone poisoned among us until they are almost mature enough to join the military or hold a steady job elsewhere.

a building spree, throwing up new construction whether they need it or not.

Don't forget the swanky Student Rec Centers that look like high end country clubs!

Why not provide four years of education at a public college (Harvard, Yale etc you are on your own) in exchange for two years of public services - in the military, the peace corps, national park service, etc.

Every time I suggested that in the past I was practically run off of the website.  Only 5% of the entire country are veterans and there is plenty of evidence that they aren't always the best and brightest either, but that means 95% aren't interested and certainly not being "forced" to do so.

Personally, I think it would make them all grow up quicker with better values.

Only 5% of the entire country are veterans and there is plenty of evidence that they aren't always the best and brightest

uh, it was a pretty low bar to clear back in the 60's and 70's, as evidenced by some of older maga vets ...

Split

So they leave with a degree in Greek basket weaving and the college experience and no viable skills to make a living to the level to which they feel entitled because they are college graduates.

I get your point but I just do not buy it - if they are going for the experience then get a degree in business or engineering or education or nursing or anything that will provide a viable career path.

Personally, I think it would make them all grow up quicker with better values.

Totally agree

Worst money I ever spent was putting myself through the last few years of college at night for a "Marketing degree",  nothing more useless in my opinion.

Best thing I ever did was force the oldest child to stay in Air Force ROC instead or the USMC ROTC program.

She has two great careers to brag about. 

Put two people through nursing school and both hated nursing (and most people).

Back after the Big War and getting a finger shot off, the FIL went to college in LA to be a civil engineer and was hired right away by the City of LA to do exactly that.

These times are different and we have to adapt and overcome.

Good post.

"Greatest good for the greatest number" is where the Dems must be: health and education, and then health and education, and then... health and education.

Don't forget infrastructure and environment.

I didn't forget them. Those SHOULD be nonpartisan. Rich people need roads to move their companies' products, and public roads are a cheaper solution for them than some sort of "private interstate". Same for infrastructure more generally. The ultra-rich will contribute to policies that are profitable for them.

The ultra-rich will avoid paying for any services that do not bring profit. They don't use public schools or healthcare. They will avoid paying for them. The Dems should HAMMER this difference between ordinary Americans and the ultra-rich.

Then, the question becomes about class warfare, which for some strange reason no one wishes to discuss, albeit Elon Musk brings it to the forefront by putting money directly against candidates he does not wish to win and towards candidates he wishes to win and this sitting president, a billionaire himself (or "wanta-be"), shows us his OBSSESSION with making money (over against helping people).

The rich never want to talk about the power of wealth. Gosh!

Except: (as told by Mitt Romney: "In quiet rooms" (sipping a slow cocktail while counting and deal-making between themselves). But these are the very people who have been behind (and now out in the open) 'warfare' on the poor since day one! And sure, they can have their perspective and worldview about wealth and capital, but not when it belittles, demonizes , and endangers the ordinary working people who do the work that gains them 'everything.'

lbeit Elon Musk brings it to the forefront by putting money directly against candidates he does not wish to win

Unless you want to be shocked beyond your wildest dreams, don't look up how much the Soros family has spent doing that. 

But these are the very people who have been behind (and now out in the open) 'warfare' on the poor since day one!

I'm not sure how to tell you this, but they don't give a fuck about the poor.  There is no "warfare".  There is just indifference.  

I realize the existence of a powerful and mysterious enemy is a convenient crutch looking to blame some uncontrollable external factor and escape responsibility for their own decisions.  But just like the devil didn't make Carl Lentz cheat on his wife or Jerry Falwell Jr do whatever he was getting up to, rich people are not making other people poor.

And sure, they can have their perspective and worldview about wealth and capital, but not when it belittles, demonizes , and endangers the ordinary working people who do the work that gains them 'everything.'

They can have whatever perspective they want, just like you can.   They can belittle or demonize whomever they choose, just like you do.  

Yes, but there is a distinct difference, in my opinion. Near as I can discern "remotely" and unless you know something (else) I don't see where the Soros Family is working against ordinary and regular folks. That is, putting their focus on "top-down" giving overabundance of government funds to the richest people on the planet to shell out to whom they see fit, while ordinary people 'want' with no hope of relief or achieving the same ends.

Proper distinctions matter. Two or more things can look the same from a great distance, but on closer inspection, look, are not actually the same at all. Surely, everybody here has had experience with this.

I'm not sure how to tell you this, but they don't give a fuck about the poor.  There is no "warfare".  There is just indifference.  

That's a. . . untruth. As delineated by the on-going fact that the Trump/Musk 'grouping' in D.C. (along with MAGAites) have attempted to throw 'working' government workers out of their jobs and careers simply so they can gouge the federal coffers for their 'wants' without direct oversight. That is not being indifferent. That is intent. 

I realize the existence of a powerful and mysterious enemy is a convenient crutch looking to blame some uncontrollable external factor and escape responsibility for their own decisions.  But just like the devil didn't make Carl Lentz cheat on his wife or Jerry Falwell Jr do whatever he was getting up to, rich people are not making other people poor.

Bull-crap! Responsibility is getting up and going to work everyday to make a living or something of oneself. Being a jerk is sitting in judgement and making policy/s that 'damn' good people who are different and seek after a different (but reasonable) like for themselves 

They can have whatever perspective they want, just like you can.   They can belittle or demonize whomever they choose, just like you do.  

My problem is with bullies, jerks, and unjust/unfair persons or groups!

I'm not sure how to tell you this, but they don't give a fuck about the poor.  There is no "warfare".  There is just indifference.

Furthermore, there is the matter of transgendered servicemembers being made poor by their government passing judgement that seeks to pretextually "X" them from military obligation FORCEFULLY. Just 'rub' them out. Like they were not even important while they were there. That is not indifference. That is waging warfare on personnel that will be made poor(er) by government intend to deny them equal military 'sacrifice.' Again, that is intent!

these are the very people who have been behind (and now out in the open) 'warfare' on the poor

IMNAAHO, the ultra-rich consider themselves to be a different species. Their relationship with us is like our relationship with donkeys: we both exist ONLY to serve our masters, in whatever manner they wish. They take our money, they take our lives.... 

They are our owners.

Proper distinctions matter.

That's a. . . untruth.

I'm sure you want to think so.

 As delineated by the on-going fact that the Trump/Musk 'grouping' in D.C. (along with MAGAites) have attempted to throw 'working' government workers out of their jobs and careers simply so they can gouge the federal coffers for their 'wants' without direct oversight.

Do we have evidence they are "gouging the federal coffers" or are we just making up shit to fit the boogeyman narrative?

To be clear, are we talking about rich people as a group, or just Trump and Musk?  You realize there are lots of other rich people.

Responsibility is getting up and going to work everyday to make a living or something of oneself.

Explain exactly how rich people are preventing poor people from doing that.

Do you believe that rich people don't get up and go to work every day?  Do you believe that the decisions people make while at work influence their career path? 

My problem is with bullies, jerks, and unjust/unfair persons or groups!

Define "unjust".  Define "unfair".  Who is interfering with your pursuit of your "reasonable" life? 

Where is this supposed enemy?  Name them so we can join in the public rebuke.

Is a "jerk" just somebody who doesn't give a shit about you?  Why should they?  You don't appear to care about them.

Furthermore, there is the matter of transgendered servicemembers being made poor by their government passing judgement that seeks to pretextually "X" them from military obligation FORCEFULLY.

Why should they have more rights than diabetics?  Or short people?  Or tall people?  Why don't we care about them?

That is not indifference.

Of course it is.  It's a callous indifference to the pity and subsequent special treatment to which you think trans people should be entitled.

That is waging warfare on personnel that will be made poor(er) by government intend to deny them equal military 'sacrifice.' Again, that is intent!

I'll ask again.... what about all the other people who are not permitted to serve because of medical or physical conditions?  

I didn't forget them. Those SHOULD be nonpartisan.

All of the areas listed health, education, infrastructure, environment should be nonpartisan.

I have heard many a smart liberal politician say (and rightly so) that with focus on environment and infrastructure all other agenda items will soon not matter.

I even heard a couple of Republicans (not MAGA) say the same thing.

They take our money, they take our lives....  They are our owners.

That sounds like you consider yourself a "victim" - I do not for a second believe you think of  yourself as a victim

I do not for a second believe you think of  yourself as a victim

You're right. I don't.

Then again, I'm a straight male WASP.....

... and I'm not blind.

I don't have a reply to that. Just a 'gasp!'

Do you believe that rich people don't get up and go to work every day?

What I believe is that 'workers' of all stripes get up to work in-home or outside the home when they work. I hope that is clear now, because I will not be indulging delaying tactics to this discussion much longer.

Then again, I'm a straight male WASP.....

So is that all there is to you?  Your views, values and ideologies can be summed up in a four letter acronym.

I doubt it, because if that were true it would be sad, very sad.

You are intelligent, well-read and well aware of what is going on and what immediate effects and long term effects those goings on do or could have.

You have a lot more to say (I have read it often) than to simply spew rhetoric - MAGA, fascists, nazi, etc etc - 

I enjoy your view points (I agree with lots of them but not all) 

Why should they have more rights than diabetics?  Or short people?  Or tall people?  Why don't we care about them?

"Transgendered people' don't have more rights and as a matter of official record they have expectation of not having a job they were doing quite well as non-diabetics, as standard regulation sized individuals, and performing in the service of their country! 

MAGAites 'say' with their rhetoric how people should get jobs, but no sooner than MAGA Leader Trump gets into office, he hinders and fires trans-personnel as if they are scum. 

They are not scum. MAGAites should be ashamed, but they are not! I am ashamed of MAGAites.

As for the rest of your comment I did not bother to mention: It's 'smoke and mirror' political nonsense. When MAGAites want something. . . to do something for someone they find the will and the way to make it happen. MAGAites do not want to help transsexuals in the service, in fact, y'all want to hurt them. The hatred is the thing, and no amount of smoke and mirror politics can disguise the deliberate intend of cruelty.

Transgendered people' don't have more rights

Clearly you think they should.  If a diabetic is ineligible for service because of a medical condition that requires constant medication, that's not any different from a trans person being ineligible for service for the same reason. 

Just because the previous administration extended preferential treatment does not mean that should be the expectation.

As for the rest of your comment I did not bother to mention: It's 'smoke and mirror' political nonsense.

Translated: you once again cannot answer even the most basic questions about your views and are afraid you'll have to confront the fact that some of them make no sense.

Think whatsoever you wish. The good news is I can only be baited by MAGAites if I want to be: I don't choose to let that be the case for Jack in Tx. Peace out, Jack.

So is that all there is to you?

That's an interesting question. Not the content, which is banal... but the fact that you ask it. Why?

Am I to think that you didn't understand the context in which I made the statement?

Did you read something in my Reply to indicate that I believe "straight male WASP" is a complete description of me?

Or... is something else going on here?

You have a lot more to say (I have read it often) than to simply spew rhetoric - MAGA, fascists, nazi, etc etc -

I have never called anyone a Nazi, other than certain Germans from the 1920s to 1940s. I have often gone to great lengths to distinguish between "ordinary fascists" from Mussolini through Franco, Pinochet, and Peron to Trump, from Nazis with their Holocaust specificity. Fascists murder people, but only the Nazis did it on an industrial scale. I think the distinction is important - meriting a special place in Hell.

So... if you have indeed paid any attention to my posts, you couldn't make a list with "MAGA" and "Nazi" together. Unless you have some reason for trying to make it seem that I have at some point made that erroneous conflation.

It's a common (despicable) tactic here on NT to "paraphrase"... incorrectly. To slip some ugly item into the paraphrase... and then attack that item as though it came from the person being paraphrased. The objective is obviously to force that person to spend time and effort, defending against the phoney charge.[✘]

Is that why you asked "So is that all there is to you?"?

No

I asked because I felt you were shortchanging yourself and wondered why?

You are a premiere contributor on this site because you not only understand issues but are able to actually communicate about them.  The best of that is when the hyperbole is omitted and the issue is discussed rather than simply shouting back and forth by the two sides.

I did not say that you were the one casting all those derogatory names/labels about - I actually said that I enjoyed most of your posts because you did more than just throw names/labels around as many do.

I totally agree with you on the approach of many on NT to just paraphrase out of a comment in order to make a comment into something it wasn't.  It is because those folks have little of consequence to say about most issues

I totally agree with you on the approach of many on NT to just paraphrase out of a comment in order to make a comment into something it wasn't. 

That is quite common here and in social media or other online venues.  Even the "mainstream" media and our politicians engage in such tactics from time to time.  It is the inevitable result of identity politics and tribalism. "Us" vs. "them".  The goal is to put people in convenient boxes for mass ridicule, and it destroys any hope of rational debate, social cohesion, or compromise/cooperation.

The goal is to put people in convenient boxes for mass ridicule, and it destroys any hope of rational debate, social cohesion, or compromise/cooperation.

Agree

And it accomplishes absolutely nothing - you will never win someone over to your side of the argument by ridiculing them

A long time ago, I suggested to TPTB that paraphrasing should be banned on NT, in favor of copy/paste direct quotes. This would eliminate a ton of bad-faith posts.

The suggestion was ignored. I sometimes wonder if TPTB don't actually need tons of crappy posts for budget reasons. Clicks are money and running a site like NT surely needs that.

Conundrum.

Democrats have spent the last several years vacillating between being anti-Trump or just trying to outdo each other in the contest to be the most progressive/woke person in the room.

In comparison republicans have spent the last several years competing on who can get the deepest up Trump's ass, and trying to out do each other on taking away their constituent's rights or kowtowing to their billionaire overlords.

This independent centrist enjoys being woke.

It's nice having a functioning brain.

This independent centrist enjoys being woke.

Especially when you look up the actual definition of " woke ".

1 a : aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)

So in other words, pretty much virtue signaling while still believing the NIMBY attitude. Too many of those already.

Especially when you look up the actual definition of " woke ".

Yeah, well, the actual definition of  Ku Klux Klan is "family circle".  Nobody believes that bullshit either.

... the actual definition of  Ku Klux Klan is "family circle"

"Circle of brothers"

Yeah, well, the actual definition of  Ku Klux Klan is "family circle".  Nobody believes that bullshit either.

the folks who believe in what djt is selling them is 'making america great again' believe it

Well if your goal is to operate at that level, then by all means pretend "woke" isn't the cover term for a bunch of tyrannical adolescents trying to stroke their own self righteousness by demanding everybody else change behavior.

as you can see, i did not mention woke. 

your perfidious definition of the term aligns with maga's. 

Nobody is talking about superficiality here, Just Jim. And, btw, the GOP used to PRIDE itself to following rules until they saw that their brand of morality was failing the 'test' of time. And becoming "TRUMP" in two terms damn sure fails every test of morality by its promise of a-moralism.

pretend "woke" isn't the cover term for a bunch of tyrannical adolescents trying to stroke their own self righteousness by demanding everybody else change behavior.

MAGAites just want everyone else to pretend that the rightwing conservative MAGAverse isn't chock full of racists, religious bigots and bitter idiots desperately trying to "conserve" old discriminatory rules, laws and customs. That's why they have such a problem with the word "woke" because it describes a person who is 'aware' or 'awake' to their racist or discriminatory traditions, customs, attitudes and behavior. It's nearly impossible for them to keep up the act pretending not to be such massive brick headed bigots, so it's just easier for them to attack the word "woke" or "racist" so that those words lose their weight and meaning. Now these MAGAites with some of the deepest-seated racism that just permeates every pore and is at the core of their very being call everyone pointing out their bigotry a "woke" self-righteous tyrannical adolescent.

It depends on what behavior is of concern, because a great sum of republican politics can in fact be called, "virtue signaling" - from the politics of abortion to transgendered military service personnel being a 'hazard' to lethality. It's superficial and just excuses proffered to deny others their peace and proper place in a society that likes to PRETEND fairness to all. 

Yeah, well, the actual definition of  Ku Klux Klan is "family circle".

Same place that provided the definition of "woke" provides this definition of "klu klux klan", NOT the original translation.

1 : a violent secret fraternal society founded in 1915 in Georgia to maintain white Protestant cultural and political power
also : any one of more than 20 hate (see hate entry 1 sense 1c) groups that associate themselves with the Ku Klux Klan

Ask those MAGAite pretenders why it is that Trump is demanding trade EQUITY with nearly every country on the planet when he supposedly detests "wokeness" and DEI? I will suggest that it is because MAGAites put him up to it and clearly Trump is obsessed with money! These people see money as "the game" itself. So much so that as Bill Gates can attest to, those who have excesses of wealth have cash they can give away in 'super buckets' at the end of their time on Earth. Why? Because clearly they did not need to stockpile (withhold) it from circulating anyway. Money is not meant to be 'admired.' 

1 a : aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)

Who decides what's important? Especially those issues...

I'll like to answer that: We do. We decide what is IMPORTANT to us. And how "we" are treated is of the upmost importance. Why? Because as I can attest to the 'treatment' can last a lifetime! Damn it!

as you can see, i did not mention woke. 

Well you jumped in a conversation about that definition, so maybe pay attention.

your perfidious definition of the term aligns with maga's. 

You mean maga icons like James Carville?  Who was warning these morons for over a year that they were Trump's best campaign workers?

The definition aligns with how most of the rest of the country sees this bullshit, which even most Democrats are now starting to acknowledge.

MAGAites just want everyone else to pretend that the rightwing conservative MAGAverse isn't chock full of racists, religious bigots and bitter idiots desperately trying to "conserve" old discriminatory rules, laws and customs.

Look, you're on about your 10th comment giving clear indication you've never actually met one of these people in person. So if/when you can take a break from basking in the glow of your own imaginary moral superiority, go meet some people with a different opinion. You'll be amazed.

That's why they have such a problem with the word "woke"

They don't give a fuck about what term you use. It's the obnoxious bullshit you pack into it.... like this:

it describes a person who is 'aware' or 'awake' to their racist or discriminatory traditions, customs, attitudes and behavior.

No it doesn't. It describes a person obsessed with their own white liberal guilt who demands everybody else participate so they can feel validated.

[✘] Leave the rest of us alone. That's not maga sentiment, BTW, that's most of us.

attack the word "woke" or "racist" so that those words lose their weight and meaning.

Those words lost their meaning because people claiming the banner misused them to try and broadcast their own [self-righteousness...]

[✘] Now these MAGAites with some of the deepest-seated racism that just permeates every pore and is at the core of their very being call everyone pointing out their bigotry a "woke" self-righteous tyrannical adolescent.

I just can't imagine how you're not winning over the hearts and minds of America.[✘]

It depends on what behavior is of concern, because a great sum of republican politics can in fact be called, "virtue signaling"

Yes.

- from the politics of abortion to transgendered military service personnel being a 'hazard' to lethality.

And yet you've managed to misidentify it spectacularly.

It's superficial and just excuses proffered to deny others their peace and proper place in a society that likes to PRETEND fairness to all. 

Define "proper place".  

Define "fairness".

You run into the same problems here that people do with "woke".  Folks don't believe what you want to pretend those words mean because they've seen what you really mean when you use them.

Exactly. 

So what they pretended it meant wasn't anywhere close to what it actually meant.  Just like "woke".  Or "antifa".  

Things aren't always what people say they are.

Al Capone didn't actually make his money as a restauranteur.  Benny Hinn didn't actually heal people.  The Templars weren't actually poor. Donald Trump isn't.... well... shit... I hardly know where to start.

Why is it so important to have a label for every individual in our society?

Define "folks." 

"Proper place" means free, fair, equitable. Just like MAGAites want their "proper place." (Although, MAGAites behave like they own all the "places.")

"Fairness" means treat others like or better than MAGAites wish to be treated. That is, with compassion, mercy, justice (as defined by rule of law-not arbitrarily), kindness, and above all do no harm. And when/if you can't do that then simply leave others alone to serve their 'god/gods/appetites' which cause no harm to you.

Define "folks." 

The majority of mainstream Americans.

Proper place" means free, fair, equitable

No, it doesn't.  "Proper place" is a noun.  Free, fair, and equitable are all adjectives.  Moreover, they are all highly subjective adjectives, which is the point.  The way you use those words is different than the way somebody like Vic or Charger or TiG or I or someone else might use those words.  So be specific.

Fairness" means treat others like or better than MAGAites wish to be treated.

How are rich people not doing that? What specific behavioral change are you looking for?

And are we talking about rich people as a group or have you moved on to maga conservatives or are we specific to Elon and Trump?    

That is, with compassion, mercy, justice (as defined by rule of law-not arbitrarily), kindness, and above all do no harm.

Compassion, mercy and kindness are again... all highly subjective terms.  Be specific.  Give some examples.  What would it look like if these things were in place?

As far as "justice as defined by rule of law", what laws are being broken to harm poor people?  

And when/if you can't do that then simply leave others alone to serve their 'god/gods/appetites' which cause no harm to you.

The irony here is hilarious.   The number one, overwhelming objection to the entire "woke" movement is that they absolutely refuse to leave anybody else alone. 

Say something they don't like.... cancel.  Refuse to immediately act on their whim.... protest.  Refuse to meet their protest demands.... vandalism.  Say things they don't like... more vandalism.   

Seem like odd ways to express "compassion, mercy and kindness".

Why is it so important to have a label for every individual in our society?

Those labels are called NAMES.  Otherwise who would know who you are talking about?

Look, you're on about your 10th comment giving clear indication you've never actually met one of these people in person.

Sadly, I'm related to a clan of them on my mother's side of the family in Arkansas. You can stop trying to pretend the types of MAGAites I'm describing don't exist. They do and in large numbers.

They don't give a fuck about what term you use.  It's the obnoxious bullshit you pack into it.

Yes, I get it that old fucking useless poorly educated conservative bigots who rage at higher education and blame all their failures on brown immigrants instead of taking responsibility for their own misery think those who call out their blatant bigotry are obnoxious. But the days of just pretending there's nothing wrong with those who continue to wallow in their racist ignorance or archaic religious bigotry while acting like they have some exclusive rights to what is "American" are over.

No it doesn't.

Yeah, it does. You and others who hate the actual definition may have invented your own definition that you can use among each other and laugh which I'm sure is easier than doing any self-reflection, but it doesn't actually change anything.

It describes a person obsessed with their own white liberal guilt who demands everybody else participate so they can feel validated.

See. A hilariously flawed and impotent attempt to rebrand something that pisses you off.

If you want to wallow in your own racist attitudes, fine.  Leave the rest of us alone.  That's not maga sentiment, BTW, that's most of us.

That reminds me of the Rorschach inkblot test joke where the punchline is "Well you're the one drawing all the dirty pictures Doc!". Progressives and liberals point out the continued legacy of racism that still infects so many parts of society and those most at home in that environment who don't like those facts being pointed out scream "Reverse racism! You're being racist to us by not just accepting the status quo where white conservative Christians are first in line! You should be happy we let you get in line at all because this is OUR Merica!". Yeah, yeah, we've heard your incessant whining, and we weren't moved.

Those words lost their meaning because people claiming the banner misused them

They weren't misused. Perhaps they were used a bit too much too early as those on the receiving end clearly can't handle truth and reality, but I have a hard time having much empathy for ignorant conservatives gnashing their teeth at change and refusing to even accept the possibility that the status quo they may currently enjoy is largely held together by silent racism and discrimination.

I know my cousins and some aunts and uncles feel that way and claim that's why they voted for Trump who will let them be as bigoted (they call it 'honest') as they want to be and proudly proclaim how much they despise those in the lgtbq community, the 'illegals' they imagine as all drug running gang members of which according to them number somewhere between 11 and 50 million and those "thugs" (they like to use that word anytime they are referring to black Americans as so many white conservatives in the South do) who they believe do nothing but riot and rob and don't think white lives matter because they had the gall to proclaim "Black Lives Matter".

So, they do exist. I've had far too many conversations with them and perhaps that is where I grew exhausted of this stupid little dance where the bigots act all offended and start claiming they're the victims when they are confronted by their own bigoted words and actions.

I just can't imagine how you're not winning over the hearts and minds of America.

Like I said, perhaps I gave up and just can't help but just throw this holier-than-though bullshit that rightwing conservative Christians have been throwing at everyone else for centuries right back in their faces. I grew up among them, I know who they are and what's going on behind that sly innocent religious conservative grin, so I feel no guilt for giving them all the verbal beatings they so dearly deserve.

Yes, I get it that old fucking useless poorly educated conservative bigots who rage at higher education and blame all their failures on brown immigrants instead of taking responsibility for their own misery think those who call out their blatant bigotry are obnoxious.

[✘] Yeah, it does.

Keep telling yourself that.

[✘] Progressives and liberals point out the continued legacy of racism that still infects so many parts of society

[✘] You're being racist to us by not just accepting the status quo where white conservative Christians are first in line!

[✘] That's literally the definition. Now, the aforementioned self-righteous white liberal guilt is unlikely to let you acknowledge that, but everybody else sees it plainly... which is why nobody is interested in you pretending "woke" is somehow noble.

They weren't misused.

Soo..... the "woke" movement actually IS about suppressing free speech, vandalism, eradicating everything they disagree with and brainless ideological puritanism?

I think that kinda proves my point.

rightwing conservative Christians have been throwing at everyone else for centuries right back in their faces.

Right. Well, church attendance has been plummeting for decades, so apparently it hasn't worked out too well for them, either.[✘]

Post doctoral level, cutting edge self righteousness.  Gotta love it.

Ah, yes. So now critiquing or finding fault with any actions of others is being "cutting edge self-righteous". It's truly comical that those who spent the last thousand years or so condemning anyone who didn't look like them, speak like them or pray like them are now whining about being picked on and other people self-righteousness. 

You can have a "mostly peaceful protest" about it and set some more fires.

Have only ever peacefully protested and have never set fires anywhere I wasn't supposed to. On top of that I've consistently condemned those who use violence and vandalism to bring attention to their causes no matter which side of the aisle they sit. But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at the dishonest lies' and libel others will fling at me when they're desperately trying to hide their own faults.

While pretending you're not the primary culprits.

Right, those pointing out racism must be the ones doing it. Perfect rightwing conservative logic.

You're being racist because you demand things be decided based on race.

So, if you've been held down by half a dozen guys and beaten in the face by your nemesis "Tommy" for the last hour, are all battered and bruised, and now the authorities arrive and say "Okay, now you guys get off him. This should be a fair fight. Just Jack and Tommy, one on one so everything's equal, now fight!". Who do you think might have the upper hand in this battle? Is it really a fair fight now after you were pummeled for an hour or so before the supposed "fair fight" started?

Pretending that the legacy and history of racism in our country doesn't have an effect today or doesn't matter and now, as long as the white manager doesn't admit he didn't hire that guy because he was black, everything's fine now, no harm, no foul, isn't 'fair' either. You can sit there and scream about how you didn't discriminate so it 'aint' your problem, but any white Christians with more than half a brain would realize how much they have been benefitting from a society skewed to cater to white Christians. To pretend that isn't or hasn't been happening is just pure self-deceit.

Soo..... the "woke" movement actually IS about suppressing free speech, vandalism, eradicating everything they disagree with and brainless ideological puritanism?

Nope. And I won't even bother trying to unravel that mess of horse shit other than to say, it's total horse shit. The term 'woke' was never misused by those identifying with it any more than the bullets intended to put a hole in a trespasser who had been warned more than once were 'misused'. Sure, the bigots who found themselves outed by the 'woke' find the 'woke' obnoxious but perhaps they should use it as an opportunity for self-reflection and change instead of just remaining such cowardly dead weight on society.

But it's good to see you acknowledge that's who you're becoming.

Anytime.

Those labels are called NAMES.  Otherwise who would know who you are talking about?

Nonsense

Libtards, MAGA, Fascists, Snowflakes etc etc etc - are not names but rather derogatory labels used largely when the speaker has nothing concrete to contribute or lacks the ability to argue with a differing point ov view and decides to denigrate rather than discuss.

at the extreme risk of tossing words into the void, disambiguation is very important.

some people mean when they say woke that they are seeing harms that have been accrued with time due to the application of rules and structures that treated some people differently than others. 

other people, you amongst them, describe being woke as a series of bad things because they wish the term to mean 'people who do bad things'

while you and other like minded people obviously 'won' the battle of popular definition, you did not change the meaning of the word for many who use it. as such, you are at best speaking at cross purposes when discussing the term, more likely you are applying the meaning of what someone is saying in a disingenuous fashion, placing your meaning on the word which the other does not accept, and vice-versa. this does nothing to advance the argumentation and just breaks down any substantive conversation that may have been going on. 

but that is your point. i can see this, as can any other thinking individual who reads this. 

so do you have anything of substance to add/ or is this just your way of trolling/

Ask federal employees that got "DOGE-ed" and transgendered service personnel if they feel MAGAites want them to have their proper place (free, fair, and equitable) in society. Ask them if they feel they are "canceled." MAGAites belligerence is all I get from these interactions. It's disgusting that real talk can't happen between citizens. I am so getting over trying. This is utterly going NOWHERE. WE ARE WASTING GOOD QUALITY TIME DURING THE DAY AND NIGHT EVEN TRYING. 

I am done with this line of bull!

Well said!

Well said.

some people mean when they say woke that they are seeing harms that have been accrued with time due to the application of rules and structures that treated some people differently than others. 

I'm sure they love to paint that idealistic picture.  But it's a bit problematic when actions don't support the words.

It's like Christians talking about God's grace while they judge everybody.   Or Muslims claiming Islam is a religion of peace while they're bombing buildings and torturing hostages.

Nobody believes the claimed idealism because they've seen too much of the reality.

other people, you amongst them, describe being woke as a series of bad things because they wish the term to mean 'people who do bad things

It has nothing to do with what anybody wishes.  It's about observed behavior. 

while you and other like minded people obviously 'won' the battle of popular definition

There was no battle.  People watched and concluded.  

That the party leaders are aoc, Crockett, Harris and buttegig explains exactly why democratic favorabilty is their lowest ever.  Any one of them actually becoming party leader would be the greatest possible gift to republicans.  not Having an actual defined leader for republicans to focus on is probably the nest thing the party has going for it right now.

Sean

I totally agree with that point

But there is plenty of time for Dem's to get their shit together - shift control of the House in 2026 and then the Senate and the White House in 2028.

IF (big IF) they get behind a real message to the people and pick a leader that will appeal to Dem's fron far left to left of center and to independents in the middle

If not, I fear Vance will continue the madness

Frankly, it is time for the elderly representatives in the party to bow out, step-down, exit stage Right. Surprisingly, many of the current 'crop' has proven to be generationally stunted by the fight on the Right. They are aging out and the fires in their bellies are simply not able to increase for the battles ahead. So, how do we get old people to step out of the limelight willingly and give a new generation of democrats its time to burn brightly and attract new 'legions' of voters:  Waiting to exhale?

CB

So, how do we get old people to step out of the limelight willingly and give a new generation of democrats its time to burn brightly and attract new 'legions' of voters:  Waiting to exhale?

I think they are waiting for something that you said above - they want to see that the "young democrats and their emerging leaders" are ready to return to brass-tack" politics

My observation and opinion is that we are witnessing a natural generational change of power structure  within a party due to natural attrition of the older subset, and that those sides do not rank the importance of issues the same or in the same way.

will be interesting to watch , because the younger subset is going to win out anyway.

But there is plenty of time for Dem's to get their shit together - shift control of the House in 2026

I don't think much of anything the Dems do will have an effect on 2026.  They will win a small majority if things improve, remain as they are, or slightly worsen.  If things are significantly worse they'll pick up a dozens of seats. Midterms are almost entirely driven by fundamentals.  Democrats anger at Trump will likely remain off the charts and make them more likely to vote.  Moreover, there base of the elderly, rich and upper middle class voters are the most likely to vote. Working class voters don't show up as consistently. With Trump voters being the most unreliable of voters, they are less likely to show up when Trump isn't on the ballot.

Unless there's some unifying gaffe or overreach by Democrats (Kavanaugh hearings saved numerous Republican senators)  they'll win simply because Democrats hate Trump. 

Mark 

Wow - that sounds like a quote from a poli-sci lecture.

I do not see Trump as a "generational change" to anything -- I think that a lot of people like some of the thngs he is doing and a lot of people hate the things he is doing.  But even a larger number (from both sides) hate the way he is doing it.

I am confident that there will be a large turnout in rural Ohio and they are going to be voting for change because they are getting all the pain and not seeing much gain right now.

they'll win simply because Democrats hate Trump. 

And in 2028, they will hate the "spawn of trump" (Vance) just as much - if they are able to get their shit together in 2026 then they will be strong in 2028 and they will retake the Senate and the White House.

You missed my point.   The motivated haters can only vote once in each election.  The hate  vote will turn out for midterms. That number doesn’t really change.
 Presidential elections have a much bigger electorate than mideterms and include  tens of millions of voters who aren’t motivated enough to vote in midterms. It’s those low intensity voters who trump and republicans have relied on recently. If Vance turns them out, he can win just like trump did and he will have it easier in 2028 becuase there will be a specific democrat to attack.

Against even a modestly effective candidate I am not sure Vance could ger reelected as a Senator from Ohio so I think he will be tremendously less effective in getting the vote out.

As to the "hate vote"

MAGA hates the left (openly) as much or more than anyone hates Trump.

I think part of the message in 2026 will be that The Dems need to regain control of the Congress in order to check the chaos until a Dem can be elected president in 2028.

The chaotic times that have been created in these past few months are going to drive more of the so-called "low intensity voters" to the polls in future elections than you seem to think.

am not sure Vance could ger reelected as a Senator from Ohio so I think he will be tremendously less effective in getting the vote out.

Put your personal bias aside. He has a better favorability rating than aoc, harris or walz.

AGA hates the left (openly) as much or more than anyone hates Trump.

 No kidding. so when the Democrats actually have a leader for Republicans to concentrate criticism  on, its better for Republicans.  s.  In 2026, they can only play defense nationally.  

he chaotic times that have been created in these past few months are going to drive more of the so-called "low intensity voters" to the polls in future elections than you seem to think.

If true, that's good for Republicans. For all this talk about how "chaotic" things are, Republicans are either winning or up two points on the most recent generic ballot polls, which means an incredibly tight house race in 2026 given Democrats advantage in gerrymandering.   If the election were today, Republicans would do very well, if the low intensity voters 

that sounds like a quote from a poli-sci lecture.

sometimes a blind squirrel gets lucky and finds a nut , even one that likes its solitary lifestyle and dislikes the crowds and is likely better off left alone like they want  .

As for trump , he is still of the boomer generation, its the post boomers that from here on out that are likely to direct how government is run . boomers are slowly becoming the minority through natural attrition , and my observations say , they dont like losing control or power and influence , no matter what party they follow .

I will admit , the past 4 months have given me more times to say WTF with things trump has done than i ever said raising kids . but thats just me , a political party of one .

aoc, harris or walz.

No one cares about those three and just because crazy people like crazy people does not make any of them less crazy.

the past 4 months have given me more times to say WTF with things trump has done than i ever said raising kids .

Now that's saying something

I fear Vance will continue the madness

You do remember traditional America?

I hope Vance or Rubio or DeSantis will continue what Trump began.

I hope Vance or Rubio or DeSantis will continue what Trump began.

Yeah, that would be wonderful Vic.   Keep on imposing tariffs and removing them.   Keep on illustrating to the world that the good faith and credit of the USA is no more.   Keep on abusing the powers of the office for personal whims.  Keep on trying to be above the law and the CotUS.  Keep on being a vindictive prick who abuses the presidency to get back at opponents.   Keep on lying daily to the American people.  Keep on with a PotUS acting like a 5th grader and showing just how unpresidential one can be while holding the office.

What kind of bizarre twist on reality do you perceive to want more of Trump?

The actions and attitudes of Vance and Rubio are in no way indicative of anything that can be considered "traditional America".

Rubio has changed his position on Trump and issues so many times that he longer knows what his opinion or beliefs are and simply repeats whatever Trump tells him.

And Vance is simply an acolyte who will never be president of anything

Yes sir

 Four years of open borders, inflation, crime and Marxist ideology all brought to end because we put a crazy Trump in the White House!

and it all come to an end in 100 days.  

Four years of open borders, inflation, crime and Marxist ideology all brought to end because we put a crazy Trump in the White House!

Such fantasy.  Good grief Vic.   Trump focused on closing the border more than Biden so he gets that credit.   Inflation?  Inflation was already down when Biden left office.   Crime?   You give Trump credit here for what exactly?   Marxist ideology?  That is just crazy talk.   When people speak of Marxism as some kind of threat in the USA, they broadcast that they clearly do not know what they are talking about and are simply yelling out labels.

You ignore all the obvious major negative acts and personal characteristics of Trump and focus instead on his few good acts and then invent an alternate reality where Trump is some kind of hero.

Disgusting.

Disgusting.

But were you really expecting anything different? I think it's clear that rightwing conservatives today have convinced themselves that the "godless liberals" have nearly destroyed "their America" and thus any means will justify their ends no matter how cruel, unethical or immoral. I don't think they care one iota about the constitution unless it's actively protecting their rights, and they are outright hostile towards it when it's actively protecting a group they hate. I believe most conservatives would have no problem shredding the constitution in its entirety if it meant they could get what they want, their desired white religious conservative Christian nation run by them for them.

 Four years of open borders, inflation, crime and Marxist ideology all brought to end because we put a crazy Trump in the White House!

MAGA dismiss Harris, AOC and Buttigeg out of hand, why? Because they are black, brown or gay? Should be ashamed of yourselves...

Where is it cool to be racist, sexist and homophobic in America?

States that start with Os and Ts? Go kiss our republic a goodbye! 

  Because they are black, brown or gay?  

No, because they are not good candidates

Where is it cool to be racist, sexist and homophobic in America?

Nowhere.

Where is it cool to call everyone that does not agree with you racist, sexist and homophobic?  Should be ashamed of yourselves

facebook

Because they are black, brown or gay? Should be ashamed of yourselves...

No, normal people reject them for their extremism which includes the sort of biological essentialism you so helpfully demonstrated. It's exactly that sort of knee jerk obsession with race/gender/sexual preference to define people that the rest of us find so repulsive. It would be helpful if more Progressives could realize people are more than the color of their skin. 

Normal people is used loosely in that comment. Color of skin will become less an issue when the GOP stop trying to limit the voting power of people of color.

MAGA dismiss Harris, AOC and Buttigeg out of hand, why? Because they are black, brown or gay?

Because they suck.

One is a VP that lost an election that should have been a shoe in

One was a Transportation secretary that cared more about racist roads than air safety.

And one is a Congressperson that is just a lunatic.

No other reasons.

No, normal people reject them for their extremism

Sean

Who do you define as "normal people"?

Color of skin will become less an issue when..

when you realize that, for the vast majority of the country, nobody gives a fuck about it.  

when the GOP stop trying to limit the voting power of people of color.

You're confusing Republicans with Democrats again.  

limit the voting power of people of color.

Which party is it that tries to convince black Americans they don't know how to get IDs to vote?

Hint:  It ain't the Republican party.

Well, we know MAGAites would like to think (pretend/imagine) that all things are equal when they are getting the lion's share of rights, freedoms, and liberties, because of self-interests. I don't have that luxury. So liberals won't let MAGAites get away with stinkin-thinkin.

Every black person that can afford an ID should get off their butts and go get one. It's voluntary. And furthermore, trying to make provision for those who do not have identification to use the (a workaround) voting franchise is not limiting them; it's empowering them. 

Fifteenth Amendment

Section 1

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude–

Section 2

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Republicans like to pretend they do not see race, color or whatever. But, have been caught time and time again using neutral policy language to disenfranchise (abridge) certain groups of voters since the beginning of conservative hatred of the Other.

Agree, however your party feels otherwise

Black Americans SHOCKED That Leftists Think They Can't Get ID!

Remember acording to Harris they can't vote by mail because their is no kinkos or office max near them either. 

Which party is it that tries to convince black Americans they don't know how to get IDs to vote?

It's not the Democratic party, they're actively working with the minority communities to help make sure they can get their ID's while also fighting the Republican parties intentional attempt to disenfranchise them as the courts found Republicans " target African Americans with almost surgical precision".

" [W]ith race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans." “Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist,” the court said. Court: North Carolina Voter ID Law Targeted Black Voters | FRONTLINE

The tired moronic attempt by conservatives to claim that it's Democrats who are supposedly "convincing" black Americans that they can't get ID's is just more racist bullshit from white rightwing religious conservative holdovers and descendants of white supremacists and segregationists which ideology they clearly still cling to albeit less openly. Instead of just trying to intimidate them at the polls or to just deny them access as they had done for decades after black Americans were given the right to vote, nowadays rightwing conservatives work tirelessly at crafting laws that specifically target the forms of ID used or locations or days that black Americans tend to vote. It's not a secret, but you'd never know that when you confront a rightwing conservative with the facts, all they can do is shout "We're not the racists! It's Democrats who are the racists because they believe blacks can't get the narrow forms of photo ID that the law we Republicans recently passed require!". Nice try bigots.

You say all that yet it's YOU that interject stupid shit like race into virtually everything.  When you get to the realization that nobody gives a fuck about it you'll be much better.

the Democratic party, they're actively working with the minority communities to help make sure they can get their ID's

Why does the democrat party think that minorities are too stupid or lazy to get ID's to vote? Is it their racist Klan roots that cause them to believe this?

Emphatically. Tell it like it is. I am disgusted with the fraudsters, liars, and deceivers with their fake outrage and recalcitrance. I will fight them to the bitter end.

That is your second "Fuck" to me. It's gratuitous and so you're done. Speak to me with a civil tongue going forward. That is, I don't have to like what you write, but I won't be spoken to like some ghetto dweller when you do write.

Why is it the GOP's job to specifically look for 'neutral' circumstances to limit participation in the voter franchise? Could it be that conservative policies are so mediocre that the GOP must use every trick in the book to disenfranchise more popular and creative ways to get the public out the poles (like no mail in ballots), even when those ways work stellar?

That is your second "Fuck" to me. It's gratuitous and so you're done. Speak to me with a civil tongue going forward.

Didn't know and don't care that you are keeping count.  

I don't have to like what you write,

Nobody said you had to.  I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you react to it.

I won't be spoken to like some ghetto dweller when you do write.

You have the option to keep scrolling and / or put me on ignore.  

You're assuming Trump/MAGA/Republicans give a flying fuck about the Constitution

I've seen no evidence of that.

I won't be spoken to like some ghetto dweller 

You're Black. In MAGA America. Get used to it.

Excuse me, what the heck is that supposed to mean?

Then, so long and happy trails to you. BYE.

If the policies of the racist Klan party were any good people would put the effort into voting, so your comment is complete bullshit based on partisanship.

Until next time.

I mean that non-whites will be in for a world of hurt in a fascist dictatorship.

So describe how they suffered under Biden, he is the closest thing we have had to a fascist government.

I mean that non-whites will be in for a world of hurt in a fascist dictatorship.

When Democrats take power again?

If the policies of the racist Klan party were any good people would put the effort into voting

We saw many if not most of those from the racist Klan party of conservative Southern Democrats vote for Donald Trump in the last election. Of course most of them call themselves Republicans today, but they're not actually fooling anyone but themselves when they try the whole "Oh, no, all the racist white Christian conservative Southerners who had a stranglehold on the former confederate States for the last two hundred years all just up and moved or died off, now it's just us innocent white Christian conservative Southerners who have a stranglehold on the former confederate States! It's just a mere coincidence that we look like, talk like and act just like those racist Southern Democrats from half a century ago! Trust us! It's the truth! /wink, /wink...

What's really funny is that I think some of them have actually convinced themselves that they're fooling everyone and that they have absolutely no connection to their obvious segregationist roots. As if the Southern strategy was just a total fictional lie that never actually happened and the racists from the South just sort of evaporated over time or, what, moved to CA? I mean, it's insane on the face of it, but that's what these folk will sit there with a straight face and lie like champions.

I swear! It wasn't me!

We saw many if not most of those from the racist Klan party of conservative Southern Democrats vote for Donald Trump in the last election

That is 100% a lie, democrats by and large are the most racist antisemitic pieces of shit on the planet. the lie the party of the klan keeps telling themselves is they all became republicans while telling everyone the minorities are too stupid to succeed without their help. i would say they were hypocrites, but they actually aren't, just run of the mill racists for the most part. 

I guess the nerve I hit froze your shift key...

But seriously, you can stop trying to pretend the Republican party of today didn't absorb the former conservative Southern Democrats, no one is buying it. The facts are just too overwhelming.

Do you really believe the racist white conservative anti-abortion Southern Democrats of the 1950's would really be pretending to be affirmative action for minorities loving, lgtbq supporting pro-choice modern Democrats of today? I mean, the very idea is ludicrous and only possible if someone has their head shoved SOOOO far up their own ass they can see their tonsils.

Democrats of the 1950's...

They wouldn't even recognize the party now....

It's not the Democratic party,

You might want to tell that to the liberals in the video. They absolutely destroy your argument.

The rest of your post is just ranting, going nowhere. 

Living in California, neglect to pay for an a license and id is not something that hinders us at voting time. We have other ways to confirm our status as legal voters:

 From the California Secretary of State website: 

* THIS DOCUMENT IS CURRENT THROUGH REGISTER 2006, NO. 6, FEBRUARY 10, 2006 * 

TITLE 2. ADMINISTRATION 
DIVISION 7. SECRETARY OF STATE 
CHAPTER 1. VOTER REGISTRATION 
ARTICLE 7. VOTING 
2 CCR 20107 (2006) 

§ 20107. Standards for Proof of Residency or Identity When Proof Is Required by Help America Vote Act 

(a) This section shall apply in all instances where voters and new registrants are required by the federal 
Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666, 42 U.S.C. 15483) to prove residency or 
present documents to establish identity. 
(b) This section shall be liberally construed to permit voters and new registrants to cast a regular ballot. 
Any doubt as to the sufficiency of proof or a document presented shall be resolved in favor of permitting the 
voter or new registrant to cast a regular ballot. 
(c) If a voter or new registrant does not present proof or a document that complies with this section, then 
the voter or new registrant shall be advised by the poll worker or other election official with whom the voter 
or new registrant is conferring that he or she may vote a provisional ballot and the voter or new registrant 
shall be permitted to do so. 
(d) For purposes of this regulation, proof of residency or identity, shall consist of presenting an original 
or copy of any of the documents described below in either paragraph (1) or (2). 
(1) Current and valid photo identification provided by a third party in the ordinary course of business that 
includes the name and photograph of the individual presenting it. Examples of photo identification include, 
but are not limited to, the following documents: 
(A) driver's license or identification card of any state; 
(B) passport; 
(C) employee identification card; 
(D) identification card provided by a commercial establishment; 
(E) credit or debit card; 
(F) military identification card; 
(G) student identification card; 
(H) health club identification card; 
(I) insurance plan identification card; or 
(J) public housing identification card. 
 
 
(2) Any of the following documents, provided that the document includes the name and address of the individual presenting it, and is dated since the date of the last general election, unless the document is intended to be of a permanent nature such as a pardon or discharge or unless the date requirements of paragraph (F) apply, including:

 
(A) utility bill; 
(B) bank statement; 
(C) government check; 
(D) government paycheck; 
(E) document issued by a governmental agency; 
(F) sample ballot or other official elections document issued by a governmental, agency dated for the 
election in which the individual is providing it as proof, of residency or identity; 
(G) voter notification card issued by a governmental agency; 
(H) public housing identification card issued by a governmental agency; 
(I) lease or rental statement or agreement issued by a governmental agency; 
(J) student identification card issued by a governmental agency; 
(K) tuition statement or bill issued by a governmental agency; 
(L) insurance plan card or drug discount card issued by a governmental agency; 
(M) discharge certificates, pardons, or other official documents issued to the individual by a governmental agency in connection with the resolution of a criminal case, indictment, sentence, or other matter; 
(N) public transportation authority senior citizen and disabled discount cards issued by a governmental 
agency; 
(O) identification documents issued by governmental disability agencies; 
(P) identification documents issued by government homeless shelters and other government temporary or 
transitional facilities; 
(Q) drug prescription issued by a government doctor or other governmental health care provider; 
(R) property tax statement issued by a governmental agency; 
(S) vehicle registration issued by a governmental agency; or 
(T) vehicle certificate of ownership issued by a governmental agency

sos.ca

And yes, these 'devices' can be used by conservatives as means of identifying too in California.

This shows belief, trust, and going the 'extra' mile (in my opinion) to let the voter franchise work itself out for the good of the public and the country. However, in some states (they know who they are), limitations are placed and there is a lack of trust in the citizens to be a proper partner with the voting franchise and the states involved.

Only if you have a civil tongue, because if not. . . interaction stops at "fuck."

They wouldn't even recognize the party now....

Exactly! So why would those super religious ultra-conservative Christian Southern Democrats want to be part of the modern Democrat party? The party that authored and passed the civil rights act and voting rights act. The party that fights for minority rights and immigrant rights? The party that fights for gay marriage and transgender rights. What about the modern Democratic party would lead anyone to think "Oooh, yeah, that right there is a rightwing conservative Southern Democrat who fought against the civil rights act. I mean, look at them, electing a black Democrat President, fighting for black Americans rights, supporting affirmative action for black Americans trying to make sure there is a place at the table for their fellow black Americans, yep, total racists...". It's laughable on the face of it.

Sadly, I am compelled to agree. It's so damn sad. Just sad beyond necessity and belief! If I let myself think about it too long. . .it could depress me. And I am a positive person. . . .

You might want to tell that to the liberals in the video.

What? That bullshit 'edited-to-only-show' you what they want you to see video of random supposed "liberals" on the street trying to rationalize racist Republican laws is just that, total misdirection bullshit. I'm sorry, but anyone who is taking that video you linked as having ANY meaning other than as an absolute desperate gutter redneck trash attempt to make themselves feel better about what they KNOW they are doing to black Americans, should contact a mental health professional and ask for help immediately as they're clearly fucking insane and potentially a danger to themselves or others.

Republican strategist Lee Atwater (served Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and as RNC Chairman): 

Exclusive: Lee Atwater's Infamous 1981 Interview on the Southern Strategy

Old Joe McCarthy's right hand henchman Roy Cohn "The Worst Person in the World" had four specially handpicked protégés he taught all of his political dirty tricks. They were Lee Atwater, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and Donald Trump!

Think about that and Wake Up America!

And this is how Republicans act today when confronted by the facts...

Deny, Deny, Deny: Joey Bishop/Imagene Coca

The Republican political operatives Manafort, Roger Stone, and Lee Atwater posing for a portrait, in 1980 .  Photograph by Harry Naltchayan/ The Washington Post / Getty .

newyorker

Ah! But next time. . . snatch that adulterous heifer by the hair and hold. If she hollers then you know how real the moment is!

The facts are just too overwhelming.

Facts are unimportant. Dogma über alles.

California is a Democratic bastion. Democrats want people to vote. Democrats make it as easy as possible to vote.

The exact opposite of Red states.

Dream Team 

i guess you do not understand that he is speaking from experience, whereas you are speaking from ... ewww1 i smell something

I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you react to it.

Once again,  I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you react to it.  

Yes. I am responsible for how I react to it. Therefore, I will act kindly to what you write if it is civil (without gratuitous vulgarity in my direction).

gratuitous vulgarity in my direction

Matter of opinion.  But you have fun with that.

The aggression is noted. You may have the last word if you want it.

[✘]

There is something to be said about tempo, as in when to pick up political speed. . .and, when to slow down. 

‘Party is Completely Broken’

 facebook

It's fixable all the same. "Keep hope alive."

It is. But only if they want to fix it. IMO going farther left is not the answer.

Yes, they should not go farther "LEFT," but tack back to. . . something political that suits the citizens who vote (be pragmatic).

IMO going farther left is not the answer.

I think it is.

Would keep the lunatics out of power for a long, long time.

‘Party is Completely Broken’

I think that can be said for both parties because whatever MAGA is - it is not the Republican Party that anyone recognizes

There is no such thing as MAGA. We're just Republicans, for the most part. The Dems have no message or the wrong message. Most of the electorate have no use for open borders, out of control spending on foreign aid, benefits to illegals, climate change, drag queens reading fairy tales to kindergarteners, gender "affirming" care instead of counseling. grown post-puberty males competing against females, Hamas goons, antifa, and transfa rioting on college campuses, supporting the murderous Hamas slaughter of the Jews, and unfair and one-sided trade policies, among many other things.

Instead of cleaning up their own house, the progressives keep doubling down to "fight" against Trump instead of trying to be a bit more patriotic and positive. Instead, they fear monger and spread gloom and doom all over the place. The people have had enough of that. I don't see the left changing their ways or their ultimate agenda in time to change the midterms.

Antifa Violently Attack a Christian Worship Service, and Then the Story Gets So Much Worse – RedState

There is no such thing as MAGA.

You might wanna check with His Holiness (/s) and his legions of worshipers on that one. He has a hat that says otherwise.

Most of the electorate have no use for open borders, out of control spending on foreign aid, benefits to illegals

Even Democratic administrations deport people. There are legal ways to improve border enforcement and control, though, without sweeping up innocent people, and violating constitutional rights. Same is true of those other issues.

climate change

You have no use for climate change? What does that even mean? It’s happening whether you have a use for it or not.

drag queens reading fairy tales to kindergarteners, gender "affirming" care instead of counseling.

None of that is your personal business, nor is it being pushed on anyone by the federal government.

grown post-puberty males competing against females

Yeah, I’m not a fan, either. However, it’s super rare, and Republicans put WAY more effort into complaining about it than Democrats do in pushing it.

Hamas goons, antifa, and transfa rioting on college campuses, supporting the murderous Hamas slaughter of the Jews

The trend to remove people who disagree with you should offend anyone who says they care about the Constitution.

and unfair and one-sided trade policies

So, if you believe that, then negotiate better deals. The worst possible solution is to breach existing contracts and treaties, while throwing the domestic and global economy into chaos.

I bet you think people with student loans should honor the deals they made and repay their loans, right? I know I do. Well, the same is true of our country and the trade deals we make. Because of Trump’s insane actions on trade, no one in the world trusts us.

You will see in 2026 and 2028 that there are millions of Republicans that hate everything MAGA has come to stand for.

Millions?....

Why do you think so?

Maybe because ideology is non-eatable? We've see.

RedState is nothing but far right wing lies.

Why don't you think so?

There is no such thing as MAGA.

The left like to use that term as a childish slur against ANYBODY who even remotely goes against their narrative.  But the use of that is coming to an end as Democrats opted for " blue MAGA" as their rebranding.  

townhall

RedState is nothing but far right wing lies.

I rarely go to Red State for my news, but how about posting some of those lies in the form of the actual article and why it is a lie. No feelings or opinions allowed.

one tin soldier rides away

Starting with the antisemitism, 99.9% of which is coming from the left.

Pete Buttigieg is a logical candidate. 

Only one problem, I do not think the electorate is mature enough to overcome the bigots and elect a gay PotUS.

No, this country is not ready. There are too many people here who are liberal-moderate who can not make that leap to president for a homosexually married couple. It's just too much 'language' too navigate. . . and the GOP will have a 'counternarrative' going similar to the "machismo-fueled" he-man campaign they used against Hillary and Kamala. They, the conservatives, would probably, 'er, most definitely call the Log-Cabin Republicans 'out' to stand with a Trump or 'another' GOPer against a liberal homosexual. Then, there would be the dirty 'laundry' (remember when Buttigieg was mildly accused of sexual assault in the 2019 campaign. It came to nothing, the supposed "assault-ee" even said he was put up to it by a GOP funded operatives, thereabouts. That said, there is probably someone in Buttigieg's past that could 'fit the bill' for some sort of implied 'nastiness' of same-sex relations BEFORE marriage.

It would be the lie that goes half-way around the world before truth could get into the crowd before it disperses and goes off to carry the narrative. Why? Because people, especially "good' Christian people love to imagine all sorts of evil and sin and debauchery about homosexuals. . . even when they are mythmaker-heterosexuals steadfastly putting down and molesting our nation's homosexual citizens with their taunts, lies, and hatred.

Yeah, you are likely correct, CB.

Pragmatically-speaking, what the democratic party needs is a nimble political "brawler" that can 'slang' rhetoric and charisma a mile a minute, because Trump runs in macho-circles and John Wayne types love to imagine a 'man for all seasons' would like to kick 'booty' rather than. . . go with the 'flow.'  That is, The imagery and symbolism would be 'stacked to high-heaven' against the first serious homosexual general candidate. 

Though, Buttigieg, is a man who comes across sincere, articulate, and as a man. . . the contest would be 'on' to find an opponent that is a 'man's-man' and has the prescribed traditional wife dutifully (non-threateningly) on his arm. . . making for a 'beautiful picture' on international trips abroad.

Maybe one day, Mr. Buttigieg, but not against this 'thug' present in the white house. Trump has trained the public to accept crassness and words-tinged with bigotry and prejudice. . . he and MAGAites will let their 'freak flag' fly on insults against you and Chasten. Hell, he might even have deep research done and post questionable, lying, deceitful comments about  Chasten to give you pause. 

Finally, I am sure we would hear the  Trump-styled refrain: 'You'll lose your country and not be able to get it back if Buttigieg is president.' from conservatives and a Trump-type's lips. Spreading fear and division like 'nobody has ever seen it.' 

I do not think the electorate is mature enough to overcome the bigots and elect a gay PotUS.

A lot of people said that the US electorate was not aware enough or mature enough to elect a black man in 2008, but they were wrong

I am not sure that Buttigieg is the right candidate, but the fact that he is gay is not an issue for me or a lot of others that I am pretty sure would not find him to be the right candite "to win back the country from MAGA"

... but the fact that he is gay is not an issue for me or a lot of others ...

Hopefully, there are more people like you, but the election —and continued support— of Trump suggests otherwise.

And I am not sure the world is ready for it either. Can you imagine him going to the Middle East to do ...............well...........ANYTHING. You think our country, which is bullshit, isn't, supposedly, still respected around the world, go ahead. Run him.........by all means. The reception would be interesting to see. Talk about not taking someone seriously..............

Can you imagine him going to the Middle East to do ...............well...........ANYTHING.

Hope he knows how to do a PLF.  He may want to watch THIS before he goes.

You think our country, which is bullshit, isn't, supposedly, still respected around the world ...

You deny the degradation of trust of our nation created by Trump??   Trump is an embarrassment — an irresponsible 5th grader with a credit card and keys to the car.   He makes us look like a bunch of fools for elevating this clown to the presidency.

Can you imagine him going to the Middle East to do ...............well...........ANYTHING.

You think the USA should pick our presidents based on race, gender, or sexual orientation to please the Middle East?

You think the USA should pick our presidents based on race, gender, or sexual orientation to please the Middle East?

Did I type that? Must have been in Calibri Invisible font cuz I sure can't see it.

You deny the degradation of trust of our nation created by Trump??

To the tune of how many trillions in US investment? Why do you not see other countries WANTING to negotiate? It's right in front of you. Seems a lot of people need to take off the partisan glasses and pay the fuck attention to what is actually happening even though it doesn't go back to the same status quo we had attempted by the previous administration. THAT is the reason for Trump in today's climate. Just ask the 70 Million+ voters.

the USA should pick our presidents based on race, gender, or sexual orientation to please the Middle East?

The democrats believe that we should do that to please the 30% of progressives have a nazi like obsession with those things. 

[deleted][✘]

Did I type that? Must have been in Calibri Invisible font cuz I sure can't see it.

Yet again with the literal bullshit.   You implied that Buttigieg would have a problem gaining respect from the Middle East.   So if you were not implying that he would not be a good PotUS because of that perception from you then what were you implying?   Instead of focusing on Buttigieg's positive qualities, you focus on his sexual orientation and predict disrespect.   Yet you support the most embarrassing PotUS in our lifetimes.   Just amazing.

Why do you not see other countries WANTING to negotiate? 

Apparently you still believe what Trump says.   He is full of shit, Jim.  In his first term FDI (foreign direct investments) was under $400 billion.   With Biden it was under $600 billion.   Some of what Trump is claiming (e.g. Apple) was already planned prior to his second term.   So while I will applaud anything he brings in, you really need to stop believing what this lying sack of shit spews each week.

As for negotiation, again you believe Trump's bullshit that nations are begging to negotiate ... as if his threats are the only way they would have negotiated with the USA.   Just sickening to see the gullibility of the US public.   The USA could at any time open negotiations with EU, Japan, Canada, Mexico, China, etc.   We could have done this privately and diplomatically.   Even Trump negotiated deals in his first term without this outrageous, belligerent, relationship-damaging bullying / trolling attempts.   We could have issued threats (if really needed) privately and more diplomatically.   There was no need for Trump to engage in his junkyard dog, bullying nonsense.   That was brain-dead stupid with no upside and just caused harm that will take years to repair.

Trump is an idiot and a pathological liar.   Don't believe what he says.

The democrats ...

Yet again, a partisan deflection.

Instead of focusing on Buttigieg's positive qualities, you focus on his sexual orientation and predict disrespect.

Please give us some. Palestine, Ohio folks would disagree, as will anyone who follows Mr. B and his record. A lot of allocating money for projects that didn't quite get rolling let alone complete.

Here is a list of "almosts".

AI generated from a plethora of input sources.

AI Overview

Pete Buttigieg is known for several achievements, including becoming the first openly gay man to launch a Democratic presidential campaign and the first openly gay Cabinet secretary in U.S. history.   He also served as Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and played a role in opposing discriminatory legislation like the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act".   In his role as Secretary of Transportation, he focused on infrastructure improvements and pledged significant funding for infrastructure projects.  

Please give us some.

An act of futility.   You cannot see the presidential qualities in Buttigieg so me describing same to you is pointless.

Try me. If, of course, you have some earth shattering presidential qualities. All I can see is he is slightly below Jimmy.

Unless of course, that well is dry.

My perspective is this.   Anyone who still supports Trump has, in my opinion, a bizarre understanding of presidential qualities.   That intelligence, diplomacy, decisions based on facts, decency, integrity, intention to faithfully execute the oath of office, view of the office as a duty and not a personal gift of power, etc. are important qualities in a President.

That's nice but can we get back to presidential qualities Mr. B has? Or are you actually going to use those? If so, you lose. Now, examples of his qualities with specific accomplishments.

Thanks in advance, but please, don't bother trying to get me to go down your rabbit hole. Perceptions are of personal nature and I just don't' see the strength in "them" as it connects to the presidency

I just listed key qualities and, as predicted, you do not seem to recognize the importance.   Exactly what I expect from someone who still supports Trump.

So give examples of Buttigieg displaying those qualities. That is all I am looking for. You posted generalities instead of fact when it comes to "them".

You cannot see the presidential qualities in Buttigieg so me describing same to you is pointless.

Well... I don't see them either, and it's got nothing to do with who he sleeps with. 

I vote for a gay candidate last time.  I honestly DGAF about that.  I just don't see PB as a remotely viable candidate.

And you also said tim walz is a moderate and would make a good president.

If someone is blindly right, everyone will be perceived as left to them.   

I would take Walz as PotUS over Trump without hesitation.   But you, even after seeing what he has done and what he is, still support Trump.

I just listed key qualities and, as predicted, you do not seem to recognize the importance. 

I think it's pretty obvious that most conservatives today prefer their Presidents to be in the mold of old WWF Superstars. They're fictional characters sure, but that doesn't matter. Their mottos and ideals are easily understandable for those with under room temp IQ's. They don't want an actual competent intelligent President; they want a guy screaming at the crowd and getting them all hyped up and telling them what they want to hear and then they want a mascaraed villain like the Iron Sheik to waltz in and be the predictably horrid protagonist everyone loves to hate.

After Trump, there is really no point in even bothering to consider what reprobate conservatives are looking for in a candidate. Perhaps they'll escalate from wanting a candidate who says he likes to grab women by the pussy to a candidate that just openly admits fornicating with sheep as it's pretty clear there simply is no bottom to what they will accept as long as the sheep fucker promises to ban abortion or protect their fantasy 'white Christian nation'.

I don't see them either, ...

You do not recognize that Buttigieg is an adult, well-reasoned, articulate, respectful of duty and honor oath of office, competent, knowledgeable, intelligent, etc.?   Or is it that you do not consider those to be presidential qualities?

[✘] so you’d take walz, good for you. I wouldn’t. And yep, i still support trump, through all the bluster i think he’s on the right track. He’s already been way more successful than biden and harris, just look at the border.

And yep, i still support trump ...

Blindly.

You think the USA should pick our presidents based on race, gender, or sexual orientation to please the Middle East?

No, MAGAites do not think that. But, it's an 'excuse' that blames someone else for any disrespect they hold for their fellow citizenry, because we know that MAGAites only need one reason to not vote for Buttigieg and that reason they hide behind political smoke and mirrors.

Your opinion is wrong. As someone has said a million times, buy a vowel.

But, it's an 'excuse' that blames someone else for any disrespect they hold for their fellow citizenry,...

Mmmm, sounds alot like "Progressives" don't you think?..

Or is it that you do not consider those to be presidential qualities?

I don't see them as anything special.   You and I have all of those qualities.  That doesn't make us presidential material.

He's severely uninspiring.

Did you vote for a LGBTQ candidate for president? Surely you did not, because it was not feasible. And of course, Trump with his exploitation of the citizenry is a 'shoe-in' because he will tame 'em homosexuals at the national level.

MAGAite yesterday, MAGAite today, MAGAite forever!

Did you vote for a LGBTQ candidate for president?

Absolutely.  Chase Oliver.

Didn't you?

Surely you did not, because it was not feasible. 

Why wouldn't it be?

I sure as hell wasn't going to vote for Trump or Harris.  

No. And, I am done wasting precious time. Think whatsoever you want. 

Why would I vote for a conservative libertarian on the GOP ticket? Fact is, with what I have read about the Log Cabin Republicans I would have a hard time voting for one of them too. Generally speaking, conservatives on all sides of the aisle are jerks. And that is saying something. 

That said, glad to see that a homosexual is trying to move the 'needle' in the conservative world. Good luck, future Chase! You've got your work cut out for you. MAGA GOP branding will stop you in your libertarian tracks 'every time.' (Psst. They won't want 'you.'  They 'suffer' you.)

Hit me up when you get somewhere I can see you without the 'baggage' stacked high around you.

I don't see them as anything special. 

Very few contemporary politicians (i.e. people we could vote for) have the qualities I stated.   You want to add "inspirational" to the list.   Fine, do so.  I think that is a very good quality to add.

That does not change my point.   What I listed are all qualities that Buttigieg has and that many politicians do NOT have.   If we can find someone who has even more presidential qualities (e.g. an inspirational leader) then I am all for it.

Who do you suggest has these qualities?

He's severely uninspiring.

Severely so?   Really?  Who are you comparing him to?

He is short too.   He does not have a strong resume of experience like Harris had.   He is not married to a woman with a family.    All challenges to getting elected.   But as it stands right now, he is more presidential and competent than most of the pack.   Josh Shapiro comes to mind as a stronger candidate than Buttigieg.   Any others?  

On the GOP side, I am now at a loss.   I have zero respect for anyone who endorsed Trump so my candidates are off the list.   Chris Christy would make a good PotUS but his negatives essentially eliminate him from consideration.   The ones I would prefer —Mitt Romney types— are all too old.

Why would I vote for a conservative libertarian on the GOP ticket?

Well..... he wasn't on the GOP ticket. That was sort of the point.

Fact is, with what I have read about the Log Cabin Republicans I would have a hard time voting for one of them too.

Read about?  How is it possible you've never met one?  That just explains soooo much.

Who do you suggest has these qualities?

If these are the qualifications:

an adult, well-reasoned, articulate, respectful of duty and honor oath of office, competent, knowledgeable, intelligent, etc.?

I've already mentioned Mark Kelly.  Someone else mentioned Josh Shapiro.  I'd add a longshot Jake Auchincloss.  Glenn Youngkin comes to mind.  There are more.

Libertarians run on the republican ticket in the general election for president, as I understand it.

You have probably met more Log Cabin Republicans than I have. Incidentally, I have not met my "Hero" in this life either. It could explain sooooooooooooo much too! (Wink-wink.)

Libertarians run on the republican ticket in the general election for president, as I understand it.

No.  They have their own party.

[Libertarians] have their own party.

Of course, but do they run as libertarian after the primaries in the general election? Wait! They don't get that far do they?! Because libertarians align themselves with the GOP. But you know that already. Just more waste (abuse) of our time allotted here.

Of course, but do they run as libertarian after the primaries in the general election?

Yes.  He ran as a libertarian.

Wait! They don't get that far do they?! 

Yes.  They do.  He was on the ballot.

I'm not sure how this is a difficult concept.

I suggest you not spend too much time on it. I certainly won't on a conservative libertarian. And no, I do not have bias against libertarians as a group, I just do not have any interests in people who side with MAGAites to hurt other people. That said, I would love to 'talk it out' with a libertarian sometime. . . online or in real life. Alas, it seems like a pipe dream for all this time I have spent trying online. And yes, I know what the problem is: it's the conservative bias that splits our worldviews.

I just do not have any interests in people who side with MAGAites to hurt other people.

Do you understand how elections work? 

He ran against Trump.  That's the opposite of "side with".

Sigh! I am not 'obsessing' on Chase. I am speaking generally now, and it should be obvious. Libertarians are aligned with the GOP because they share a common conservative worldview. Just look at congress and where they are seated in house and senate. Move off the point about Chase. He is one 'alone' libertarian that had no effectual power to make it to the general election. Thus, he is not now or ever the point of this discussion.

Usually do.

Libertarians are aligned with the GOP because they share a common conservative worldview.

Do you think so?... 

"Common" is the operative word there. 

What do you consider to be a common conservative?

You should answer that for the room, as my consideration won't carry much weight. The question to be "considered": What is the common conservative worldview?

What is the common conservative worldview?

That's a very good question... today. I know what "conservative" meant in the past, even as recently as a few decades ago. But I don't know what it means today.

I agree that it would be interesting to hear from our certainly-not-woke NT members on the subject. Maybe they know what a conservative is today. Maybe.

Bob

I agree with you that "conservative" does mean what it used to mean -

Merriam Webster gives us

one can be conservative without the extremism of MAGA

As an individual, undoubtedly. But there's no political home for such a person today... at least there's none that I can see. The Republican Party is totally subservient to a fascist narcissist would-be dictator, and the Libertarians are Republicans with a very thin veneer.

Let's face it: there hasn't been a good, honest Republican in the White House since Eisenhower, and he could just as easily have been a Democrat. Romney père et fils might have been OK, but we'll never know.

Of course, MAGAites take a 'drive-by' on supplying information about their 'program.'

But there's no political home for such a person today... at least there's none that I can see.

You know I have a home, and a family and lots of friends - I (and many millions more I think) don't need a political nest, name or theme song to be good American citizens.

Around here people voted left, right, left, left, right, right etc etc as they go down the ballot.  They vote for the people they know and trust - an R or D after their name means nothing.

there hasn't been a good, honest Republican in the White House since Eisenhower,

I disagree but that is a discussion for another day.  I was a born and raised Democrat, pro-union and liberal as they come as I reached adulthood.  I followed a lot of blue dog democrats through the transition to Reagan deocrats.  Since then I have been conservative on the fiscal and moderate to slightly liberal on social issues.  That is where more Americans should be.

But like I said a discussion for another day.

Thanks for the back and forth - really enjoy it.

Ummm....... You're implying that there is such a thing as a "MAGA program".

My pleasure, and my thanks, too.

Of course, MAGAites have a program. See it running through the life-blood of this country right now—like a 80 percent toxin. If it has a name it is: Project 2025. (You know, the program that was written down and printed by Trump compatriots from his last administration plus, and denied by Trump ("I know nothing about Project 2025."), but started up operations (lights were turned on in the Project 2025 apparatus) the day he took office.

But... but... but... Trump has said he's never heard of Project 2025.

And we know we can trust every word he says.