|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Also I wanna say very clearly that this attempt to blame Democrats for being "too woke" or moving "too far left" or whatever is an attempt at destroying the Democrat party. It's a lie. The Democrat party of the 21st century is built on DEI and has succeeded in very large part because of it. If they now start to alienate their voter base because of nonsensical criticism, they'll be making a HUGE mistake. They need to work on sticking the landing, they do NOT need to divert course.
There's only one thing they can improve in terms of direction: they need to learn to appeal to men better, in particular white men. They need to make sure not to alienate them for the sake of inclusion. Men, including white men, must be part of that inclusive process.
|
its really funny that Democrats are both to 'woke' and went to far right in the same election depending on who you talk to, and sometimes even when talking to the same person...
|
United States24615 Posts
On November 17 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
its really funny that Democrats are both to 'woke' and went to far right in the same election depending on who you talk to, and sometimes even when talking to the same person...
When I mentioned this a few days ago I was told they tried to do both and did both badly.
It's just getting to the point where I don't trust anyone's criticism of the democrats as a party anymore unless it's backed by clear data. It's just open season right now and is a great distraction from how more than a few thousand people are actually willing to vote for Donald Trump for a public office.
|
On November 17 2024 00:42 Magic Powers wrote:
Also I wanna say very clearly that this attempt to blame Democrats for being "too woke" or moving "too far left" or whatever is an attempt at destroying the Democrat party. It's a lie. The Democrat party of the 21st century is built on DEI and has succeeded in very large part because of it. If they now start to alienate their voter base because of nonsensical criticism, they'll be making a HUGE mistake. They need to work on sticking the landing, they do NOT need to divert course.
There's only one thing they can improve in terms of direction: they need to learn to appeal to men better, in particular white men. They need to make sure not to alienate them for the sake of inclusion. Men, including white men, must be part of that inclusive process.
Bolded - if they'll succeed just a little bit more California will go red...
|
On November 17 2024 00:31 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 00:25 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote:
I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do. On November 17 2024 00:16 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:13 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:58 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote:2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women. Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to! On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:22 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:13 oBlade wrote:
[quote]
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk. Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics. The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice. Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930. At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas. https://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith. "First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you. The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it? "Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here. Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party. Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women. What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women. Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM. The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case. You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument. Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/
My mistake, 51/44, it's even closer than I thought.
|
On November 17 2024 02:05 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 00:31 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:25 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote:
I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do. On November 17 2024 00:16 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:13 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:58 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote:2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women. Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to! On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:22 Magic Powers wrote:[quote] Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics. The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice. Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930. At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas. https://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith. "First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you. The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it? "Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here. Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party. Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women. What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women. Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM. The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case. You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument. Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/ My mistake, 51/44, it's even closer than I thought.
Yeah, across all women. If you narrow down by age, suddenly everything changes. Shocker: old women don't care about young women. They're selfish.
|
On November 17 2024 01:56 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 00:42 Magic Powers wrote:
Also I wanna say very clearly that this attempt to blame Democrats for being "too woke" or moving "too far left" or whatever is an attempt at destroying the Democrat party. It's a lie. The Democrat party of the 21st century is built on DEI and has succeeded in very large part because of it. If they now start to alienate their voter base because of nonsensical criticism, they'll be making a HUGE mistake. They need to work on sticking the landing, they do NOT need to divert course.
There's only one thing they can improve in terms of direction: they need to learn to appeal to men better, in particular white men. They need to make sure not to alienate them for the sake of inclusion. Men, including white men, must be part of that inclusive process. Bolded - if they'll succeed just a little bit more California will go red...
One or two presidential elections prove nothing. Democrats had Obama twice and Biden once. If they don't repeat the same obvious mistakes and just keep pushing for what's right, they'll be back on track to scoring win after win.
|
On November 17 2024 01:37 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
its really funny that Democrats are both to 'woke' and went to far right in the same election depending on who you talk to, and sometimes even when talking to the same person...
When I mentioned this a few days ago I was told they tried to do both and did both badly. It's just getting to the point where I don't trust anyone's criticism of the democrats as a party anymore unless it's backed by clear data. It's just open season right now and is a great distraction from how more than a few thousand people are actually willing to vote for Donald Trump for a public office. I legit don't think it mattered at all what the Democrats did. They could have run the perfect campaign (they obv didn't) and the result would have been the same. As Kwark so eloquently put it, the Democrats lost because Biden pulled the secret White House Inflation lever. Everything else is just fluff.
|
On November 17 2024 02:09 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 02:05 oBlade wrote:On November 17 2024 00:31 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:25 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote:
I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do. On November 17 2024 00:16 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:13 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:58 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote:2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women. Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to! On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:
[quote]
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you. The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it? "Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here. Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party. Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women. What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women. Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM. The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case. You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument. Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/ My mistake, 51/44, it's even closer than I thought. Yeah, across all women. If you narrow down by age, suddenly everything changes. Shocker: old women don't care about young women. They're selfish.
Good let's keep going and get that mask all the way off. Can you give us some more detail about how bad old women are in order to save us from sexism? The old women are selfish because they don't copy young women's voting trend right - shouldn't the 18-29-year-olds vote the same way as old people if they were selfless though? How can we account for that? Looks like the 18-29-year-old trend is selfishness too unless I missed something.
Here's another interesting group. Your data says here parents go basically 10 points further towards Republicans than not. What could be a more selfish segment of society than parents?
|
On November 17 2024 02:16 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 01:37 micronesia wrote:On November 17 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
its really funny that Democrats are both to 'woke' and went to far right in the same election depending on who you talk to, and sometimes even when talking to the same person...
When I mentioned this a few days ago I was told they tried to do both and did both badly. It's just getting to the point where I don't trust anyone's criticism of the democrats as a party anymore unless it's backed by clear data. It's just open season right now and is a great distraction from how more than a few thousand people are actually willing to vote for Donald Trump for a public office. I legit don't think it mattered at all what the Democrats did. They could have run the perfect campaign (they obv didn't) and the result would have been the same. As Kwark so eloquently put it, the Democrats lost because Biden pulled the secret White House Inflation lever. Everything else is just fluff.
Indeed, I increasingly think this is the only way to make sense of the election. Absent some sort of dramatic policy shift that the DNC would never abide, I don’t think there was much Kamala could have done to overcome how many voters connected the feel of inflation with their vote.
|
On November 17 2024 03:27 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 02:16 Gorsameth wrote:On November 17 2024 01:37 micronesia wrote:On November 17 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
its really funny that Democrats are both to 'woke' and went to far right in the same election depending on who you talk to, and sometimes even when talking to the same person...
When I mentioned this a few days ago I was told they tried to do both and did both badly. It's just getting to the point where I don't trust anyone's criticism of the democrats as a party anymore unless it's backed by clear data. It's just open season right now and is a great distraction from how more than a few thousand people are actually willing to vote for Donald Trump for a public office. I legit don't think it mattered at all what the Democrats did. They could have run the perfect campaign (they obv didn't) and the result would have been the same. As Kwark so eloquently put it, the Democrats lost because Biden pulled the secret White House Inflation lever. Everything else is just fluff. Indeed, I increasingly think this is the only way to make sense of the election. Absent some sort of dramatic policy shift that the DNC would never abide, I don’t think there was much Kamala could have done to overcome how many voters connected the feel of inflation with their vote.
Perhaps this is worth a look for them next time.
|
On November 16 2024 21:33 WombaT wrote:
That kind of stuff in my view is much more a rage fuel vote winner for Republicans than a vote loser on the Dem side of the aisle. End result is the same, but I think just as big a problem is x unpopular thing wasn’t adequately compensated by x popular thing on the Dems side of the aisle.
Not always, absolutely, sometimes it’s folks of import but the ‘war on woke’ often focuses on amplifying absolutely fringe voices with 15 Twitter followers, or fringe academic papers nobody has cited and making out they’re all that representative or influential.
It’s called the ‘culture war’ for a reason, not the ‘Harris campaign war’. Wider trends no matter how niche get attached and associated with the mainstream Democratic Party. Sometimes the party is culpable there as well I’ll concede that, sure.
But folks who make 4 hour long videos about Star Wars being too woke and folks who enjoy such content will tend to blame the Dems by association, even if it’s nout to do with the actual party.
I don’t personally think sexism, xenophobia and racism won the day in the election. But, realistically how many folks were motivated thus this election versus hardcore wokesters who don’t want to define what a woman is or whatever? I mean being realistic
The bolded is true. It's also true that the economy issue is number one and contrary to popular belief, the spending during Biden's term absolutely matters. Immigration matters, where Biden's unthinking anti-Trump position caused problems.
But immigration is actually a good segue to the culture war issues. Even Biden was enthralled to "the Groups", the background Democrat activist groups that claim to speak on behalf of their demographic like a monolith. The nature of the Dem coalition makes these groups or institutions like universities, which are far to the left of thr average American, have far too much sway. They and the people dem administrations hire from them can cause problems (like their more "humane" border policy). They have so much power that somehow in 2019 and 2020 they get Harris to say she supports sex changes for illegal immigrant felons. They are why dems spent a few years using "Latinx." A thing survey data said no Spanish speaking person actually says.
And she couldn't distance herself from that later. Partially because she's a bad candidate, but because of where she is from.
This, to me, is of the key pieces. For all dems talk, big blue states (CA, NY, IL) and big blue cities in those states (SF, NYC, Chicago) are either explicity mentioned or in the back of voter's minds. And Kamala couldn't distance herself effectively like Biden could.
For all the talk of Dems moving right, voters see them as moving left, esp on cultural issues. These big blue areas have gone all in on things like banning parental notification for potentially gender confused children, abortion effectively without limits, and a "humane" view that looks more like lawlessness and disorder. If this are the way dems run these states, why elect a former CA senator?
Links:
I've mentioned the "groups" before but here's an essay from a former Fetterman and Reid staffer making the same point
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/16/opinion/democrats-interest-groups-majority.html
Here is an interview by Ezra Klein, a very boring and uninteresting Dem hack interviewing someone where they talk about how in the Obama years the party changed. If Klein thinks it's OK to say stuff like this maybe there is hope for dems.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/13/opinion/obama-ezra-klein-podcast-michael-lind.html
Here's another short essay making the case with survey data, although some of it is a few years old. The 2024 data is still being collected, but I think pretty much all of it says that Trump was viewed as being more moderate than Kamala.
https://www.ft.com/content/73a1836d-0faa-4c84-b973-554e2ca3a227
|
On November 17 2024 02:25 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 02:09 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 02:05 oBlade wrote:On November 17 2024 00:31 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:25 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote:
I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do. On November 17 2024 00:16 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:13 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:58 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote:2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women. Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to! On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:
[quote]
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it? "Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here. Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party. Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women. What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women. Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM. The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case. You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument. Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/ My mistake, 51/44, it's even closer than I thought. Yeah, across all women. If you narrow down by age, suddenly everything changes. Shocker: old women don't care about young women. They're selfish. Good let's keep going and get that mask all the way off. Can you give us some more detail about how bad old women are in order to save us from sexism? The old women are selfish because they don't copy young women's voting trend right - shouldn't the 18-29-year-olds vote the same way as old people if they were self less though? How can we account for that? Looks like the 18-29-year-old trend is selfishness too unless I missed something. Here's another interesting group. Your data says here parents go basically 10 points further towards Republicans than not. What could be a more selfish segment of society than parents?
What are you talking about? Look at the statistics, it's very clear that young women get screwed over by the older generations of women. It's in the infographic, or do you wanna deny that?
But lets instead use an anecdotal example of this phenomenon instead of relying entirely on statistics. Do you know who Blair White is? She's a transgender woman who is, guess what, conservative. She supports Republicans and she supports legislation banning transitioning for all young people. She's a prime example of an older generation (in her case not even that old) fucking things up for the younger generation. This is a real thing! Evidently this happens even with transgender people, so it's not incredibly hard to understand that it's also a thing that happens among women.
Get your head out of the gutter. Women are not a hive mind, they don't all support each other. They absolutely do screw things up for one another if their ideology demands it.
|
On November 17 2024 05:00 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 02:25 oBlade wrote:On November 17 2024 02:09 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 02:05 oBlade wrote:On November 17 2024 00:31 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:25 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote:
I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do. On November 17 2024 00:16 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:13 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:58 Magic Powers wrote:On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote:
2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
[quote]
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party. Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women. What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women. Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM. The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case. You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument. Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/ My mistake, 51/44, it's even closer than I thought. Yeah, across all women. If you narrow down by age, suddenly everything changes. Shocker: old women don't care about young women. They're selfish. Good let's keep going and get that mask all the way off. Can you give us some more detail about how bad old women are in order to save us from sexism? The old women are selfish because they don't copy young women's voting trend right - shouldn't the 18-29-year-olds vote the same way as old people if they were self less though? How can we account for that? Looks like the 18-29-year-old trend is selfishness too unless I missed something. Here's another interesting group. Your data says here parents go basically 10 points further towards Republicans than not. What could be a more selfish segment of society than parents? What are you talking about? Look at the statistics, it's very clear that young women get screwed over by the older generations of women. It's in the infographic, or do you wanna deny that? But lets instead use an anecdotal example of this phenomenon instead of relying entirely on statistics. Do you know who Blair White is? She's a transgender woman who is, guess what, conservative. She supports Republicans and she supports legislation banning transitioning for all young people. She's a prime example of an older generation (in her case not even that old) fucking things up for the younger generation. This is a real thing! Evidently this happens even with transgender people, so it's not incredibly hard to understand that it's also a thing that happens among women. Get your head out of the gutter. Women are not a hive mind, they don't all support each other. They absolutely do screw things up for one another if their ideology demands it.
In order for that to be "clear" I'd have to be proceeding from the unproven tacit assumption that not voting Democrat constitutes "screwing over."
Again I will attempt to simplify things on the offchance it will help you will see the basic issue.
You said in a sexist tirade that old women are selfish. I don't think I'm being uncharitable if I take that to mean they are voting for what's good for them, old women, rather than what's good for other people (young women) - in your framework.
Presumably young women are also being selfish, because they are voting for what's good for them, young women. If they were selfless, they would be voting Republican, because that would help old women, who are different than young women. Right? Don't think I've contradicted you.
1) Why the a priori veneration of only young women's selfishness and demonization of only old women's selfishness?
2) What's good for old women will also be good for young women, because young women generally become old women. What's good for young women will never benefit old women.
3) Parents lean Republican because of their future young men and women. Did you want to take the opportunity to shit on them also, or not? I don't personally find parents selfish but there's no reason for you not to take up that data point and explain it.
|
On November 17 2024 05:22 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 05:00 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 02:25 oBlade wrote:On November 17 2024 02:09 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 02:05 oBlade wrote:On November 17 2024 00:31 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:25 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote:
I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do. On November 17 2024 00:16 Magic Powers wrote:On November 17 2024 00:13 oBlade wrote:On November 16 2024 23:58 Magic Powers wrote:
[quote]
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party. Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women. What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women. Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM. The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case. You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument. Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/ My mistake, 51/44, it's even closer than I thought. Yeah, across all women. If you narrow down by age, suddenly everything changes. Shocker: old women don't care about young women. They're selfish. Good let's keep going and get that mask all the way off. Can you give us some more detail about how bad old women are in order to save us from sexism? The old women are selfish because they don't copy young women's voting trend right - shouldn't the 18-29-year-olds vote the same way as old people if they were self less though? How can we account for that? Looks like the 18-29-year-old trend is selfishness too unless I missed something. Here's another interesting group. Your data says here parents go basically 10 points further towards Republicans than not. What could be a more selfish segment of society than parents? What are you talking about? Look at the statistics, it's very clear that young women get screwed over by the older generations of women. It's in the infographic, or do you wanna deny that? But lets instead use an anecdotal example of this phenomenon instead of relying entirely on statistics. Do you know who Blair White is? She's a transgender woman who is, guess what, conservative. She supports Republicans and she supports legislation banning transitioning for all young people. She's a prime example of an older generation (in her case not even that old) fucking things up for the younger generation. This is a real thing! Evidently this happens even with transgender people, so it's not incredibly hard to understand that it's also a thing that happens among women. Get your head out of the gutter. Women are not a hive mind, they don't all support each other. They absolutely do screw things up for one another if their ideology demands it. In order for that to be "clear" I'd have to be proceeding from the unproven tacit assumption that not voting Democrat constitutes "screwing over." Again I will attempt to simplify things on the offchance it will help you will see the basic issue. You said in a sexist tirade that old women are selfish. I don't think I'm being uncharitable if I take that to mean they are voting for what's good for them, old women, rather than what's good for other people (young women) - in your framework. Presumably young women are also being selfish, because they are voting for what's good for them, young women. If they were selfless, they would be voting Republican, because that would help old women, who are different than young women. Right? Don't think I've contradicted you. 1) Why the a priori veneration of only young women's selfishness and demonization of only old women's selfishness? 2) What's good for old women will also be good for young women, because young women generally become old women. What's good for young women will never benefit old women. 3) Parents lean Republican because of their future young men and women. Did you want to take the opportunity to shit on them also, or not? I don't personally find parents selfish but there's no reason for you not to take up that data point and explain it.
Taking away women's abortion rights does not constitute screwing them over? Are you sure about that?
"You said in a sexist tirade that old women are selfish."
If you think you're the one being anti-sexist here, you have a lot of self-reflection to do. Abortion rights are fundamental. You're trying to flip the morality on its head because you know exactly that your position is the unpopular one. The majority of Americans support abortion rights.
|
Are we keeping track of the dumbfucks being nominated? Head of a fracking company to head Dept of Energy?
|
On November 17 2024 04:00 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2024 03:27 farvacola wrote:On November 17 2024 02:16 Gorsameth wrote:On November 17 2024 01:37 micronesia wrote:On November 17 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
its really funny that Democrats are both to 'woke' and went to far right in the same election depending on who you talk to, and sometimes even when talking to the same person...
When I mentioned this a few days ago I was told they tried to do both and did both badly. It's just getting to the point where I don't trust anyone's criticism of the democrats as a party anymore unless it's backed by clear data. It's just open season right now and is a great distraction from how more than a few thousand people are actually willing to vote for Donald Trump for a public office. I legit don't think it mattered at all what the Democrats did. They could have run the perfect campaign (they obv didn't) and the result would have been the same. As Kwark so eloquently put it, the Democrats lost because Biden pulled the secret White House Inflation lever. Everything else is just fluff. Indeed, I increasingly think this is the only way to make sense of the election. Absent some sort of dramatic policy shift that the DNC would never abide, I don’t think there was much Kamala could have done to overcome how many voters connected the feel of inflation with their vote. Perhaps this is worth a look for them next time.
I'm fairly certain that even as we speak the Democratic party's takeaway is that they need to become even more of a right-wing party. They're hopping to the tune of Republicans, allowing them to drive the entirety of the conversation around what it means to be left wing, and are terrified of looking like they might actually be a left-wing party, because they've bought wholesale into the Republicans' definition that being left-wing is inherently bad and un-American.
Republicans call them left-wing extremists, and on command, the Democrats jolt further to the right to appease them. Of course, it never works, and the right wing only accuses them of being left-wing extremists all over again next week. They're going to learn all the wrong lessons from this. Again.
|
United States24615 Posts
On the plus side, in a few months the conversation will (hopefully) switch to how the republicans are in control of everything and yet are accomplishing nothing except for demonstrating how incompetent they tend to be at governing vice opposition grandstanding. Either that or we'll see unprecedented tragedy roll out at an alarming rate... not sure which.
|
On November 17 2024 08:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Are we keeping track of the dumbfucks being nominated? Head of a fracking company to head Dept of Energy?
Somehow less dumb than many of the big name ones lmao. At least fracking has relation to energy, though I suppose its the same sort of relation as Matt Gaetz has to justice.
|
I predict we get an article, either from The Onion or its new subsidiary InfoWars, announcing that their existence is no longer necessary now that US politics has fully and completely become a parody of itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
