My answer to those arguments would have been to nominate Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020. The American left has not been represented in the last 3 cycles but in this current one, Biden had still done far better than Trump on the metrics Bill Maher and others claim to be most important.
What has really been rejected in these elections has been tweak around the edges centrism. Trump in 2016 argued against foreign wars, for single payer healthcare(!), protecting jobs etc etc. Hillary really did just run on her identity and appeared entitled and in support of the status quo. I could see very clearly how he had a route to winning that time.
Nancy Pelosi has blamed Biden for not standing down, but the truth is a centrist would most likely still have been nominated anyway with a similar result. A Tim Walz style progressive with a record in government should be the next nominee in my view, with a platform centred around universal healthcare.
Here is where we’re just going to have to disagree. When polled, the US electorate supports the progressive position on most policies, even healthcare. They just haven’t ever been offered them in a presidential election since the time of FDR and LBJ.It was rejected at the election BSB. Harris and Walz are progressives and not only did they lose the presidential vote, they lost the popular vote, the senate and the house. As the FT article/mayer were saying the democrats have tried to move further left and it hasn’t gone well. The U.S. is a centre right, conservative (small c) country
Walz?My answer to those arguments would have been to nominate Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020. The American left has not been represented in the last 3 cycles but in this current one, Biden had still done far better than Trump on the metrics Bill Maher and others claim to be most important.
What has really been rejected in these elections has been tweak around the edges centrism. Trump in 2016 argued against foreign wars, for single payer healthcare(!), protecting jobs etc etc. Hillary really did just run on her identity and appeared entitled and in support of the status quo. I could see very clearly how he had a route to winning that time.
Nancy Pelosi has blamed Biden for not standing down, but the truth is a centrist would most likely still have been nominated anyway with a similar result. A Tim Walz style progressive with a record in government should be the next nominee in my view, with a platform centred around universal healthcare.
The highest ‘favourability’ rating of the 4 nominees and who passed free school meals for kids. Yeah, what a dick he is.Walz?
You would have thought that they would have done a bit of background to make sure he didn’t have some skeleton in his closet, like, lie about military service.
The Dem selection process:
“Right, we’ve gone for a woman of colour so all the diversity boxes are checked. Need to try to get some of the undecided and Trump-lite votes in. Let’s get a guy in who lies about military service and who’s family support Trump.” I mean, that type of thinking doesn’t promote confidence, does it?
OMG man, Walz was a disaster.The highest ‘favourability’ rating of the 4 nominees and who passed free school meals for kids. Yeah, what a dick he is.
Should have picked the man who called Trump the American Hitler…
You want to call out someone for being a liar when Trump is in the contest?OMG man, Walz was a disaster.
Democrat think tank: “Walz is looking like a poor pick with his lying and whatnot. I know, let’s go and shoot some animals”
Clueless.
Yes, my initial thoughts about the Republican pick was that they had dropped the ball. Turns out Vance resonated with the women voters and “bro” voters alike.
Pay attention man, I was calling out the Dem’s for lack of thought and vetting.You want to call out someone for being a liar when Trump is in the contest?
Popular governorPay attention man, I was calling out the Dem’s for lack of thought and vetting.
The Dem strategy was to continually attack Trump. The weak of mind just constantly calling him a “liar”.
It backfired.
Well, I guess they mainly did that because he's a liar.Pay attention man, I was calling out the Dem’s for lack of thought and vetting.
The Dem strategy was to continually attack Trump. The weak of mind just constantly calling him a “liar”.
It backfired.
So what is this 'pragmatism' from the left?Getting a leftist to have the pragmatism to see another viewpoint?
Rare.
When they do, the remaining on the left don’t like it.
For example:
Everyone on this photo used to be a Democrat supporter.
View attachment 39545
It won’t happen I can’t believe more than 30% of those voting for him believed it willSo in order to carry out this deportation of tens of millions of people, Trump is prepared to override the states’ rights he famously defended by denying women reproductive healthcare. The plan would be to summon national guard units from Republican states and send them into Democratic ones to enforce Trump’s will.
Still not a fascist though. Definitely not.
Trump’s ‘Knock on the Door’
The former president and his aides are formulating plans to deport millions of migrants.www.theatlantic.com
So it quotes Miller saying something that Trump’s ‘deportation czar’ has now confirmed. Still it says something inconvenient so you go after the source rather than the content.The Atlantic is very progressive and the take over by the Progs was the main issue not the left.
As is often the case terms in American politics mean the opposite to their normal usage
OMG man, Walz was a disaster.
Democrat think tank: “Walz is looking like a poor pick with his lying and whatnot. I know, let’s go and shoot some animals”
Clueless.
Yes, my initial thoughts about the Republican pick was that they had dropped the ball. Turns out Vance resonated with the women voters and “bro” voters alike.
Have you tried to get elected anywhere previously? If so, how did it go?
Yes I have.Have you tried to get elected anywhere previously? If so, how did it go?
Texas and Florida account for a signicant % of illegals so they will be "easy" to start with. Wouldn't be surprised if the plan is to "encourage" illegals to flee to Democratic states and let them deal with the problem. New York already being complaining about their public services being overloaded by the influx of illegals shipped there by Republican states. Also Trump will probably cut off federal funding to sanctuary cities like he did last time.So it quotes Miller saying something that Trump’s ‘deportation czar’ has now confirmed. Still it says something inconvenient so you go after the source rather than the content.
Democratic run states will not want this and Trump will use other states’ national guard to force it on them.
Reform in 2029? Genuinely interestedYes I have.
Runner up in a couple of Westminster elections, resurrected the SDP, wrote their manifesto and the policies that they now stand on and then was asked to join the governing Tory party. Opted not to stand when a / winnable safe seat in 2019 was available. (Thats how it works, it’s very rare you’re offered a winnable seat first or second time). I declined because I had a young family.
I was elected to Chair the regional Conservative Party federation in 2022 and am / was involved on Gov advisory boards / policy directives from 2017-2024.
So, no, I didn’t achieve being elected to Westminster at a time it might have worked for me. I may stand again in 2029 - not decided yet.
If your question was an immature dig, then that’s rather sad.
Clearly your political CV extends beyond being a rather boring keyboard warrior; let’s have it…..
‘Illegals’? How about calling them people for a startTexas and Florida account for a signicant % of illegals so they will be "easy" to start with. Wouldn't be surprised if the plan is to "encourage" illegals to flee to Democratic states and let them deal with the problem. New York already being complaining about their public services being overloaded by the influx of illegals shipped there by Republican states. Also Trump will probably cut off federal funding to sanctuary cities like he did last time.
Nope. Staying with Conservatives for now.Reform in 2029? Genuinely interested
Not sure that's going to convince the new Govt‘Illegals’? How about calling them people for a start
Nor am I going to be convinced by the hypocrisy of Mr ‘States’ Rights’ choosing to believe in them only when convenient.Not sure that's going to convince the new Govt
They are of course people.‘Illegals’? How about calling them people for a start
Yes I have.
Runner up in a couple of Westminster elections, resurrected the SDP, wrote their manifesto and the policies that they now stand on and then was asked to join the governing Tory party. Opted not to stand when a / winnable safe seat in 2019 was available. (Thats how it works, it’s very rare you’re offered a winnable seat first or second time). I declined because I had a young family.
I was elected to Chair the regional Conservative Party federation in 2022 and am / was involved on Gov advisory boards / policy directives from 2017-2024.
So, no, I didn’t achieve being elected to Westminster at a time it might have worked for me. I may stand again in 2029 - not decided yet.
If your question was an immature dig, then that’s rather sad.
Clearly your political CV extends beyond being a rather boring keyboard warrior; let’s have it…..
To be clear, Trump has expressed a willingness to deport legal as well as illegal immigrants. The Haitians in Ohio he falsely accused of eating cats and dogs to be one such example.They are of course people.
But they are illegal migrants or immigrants if they have not been granted refugee or owbdi status.
Someone comes into your home uninvited and without just cause then they are not a resident. They may be a guest should you choose but they are not a resident.
The leftist deception of saying things like “Trump will round upmigrants” is a deliberate stirring of disinformation.
There are legal immigrants, who have often worked hard to go through the right channels, been background checked or may even have gotten married to a US citizen. These are immigrants. Illegal immigrants who have no right to be in the US have (unless fleeing persecution) are not legal immigrants.
“Trump will round up migrants” is the type of false inflammatory language that creates division in society.
“Migrants”
Trump’s ‘Knock on the Door’
The former president and his aides are formulating plans to deport millions of migrants.www.theatlantic.com
You talk as though we don’t know why they immigrated. Daddy Trump tells you they eat pets so you believe it I guess.Seems many of the Haitians in Springfield are moving.
Begs the question on what basis they immigrated.
Nobody knows what the true crime figures are, none knows how many illegals there are, they are after all undocumented.
Reminds me of a Progressive city that downgraded charges to Agricultural Trespass as that would not be sufficient to draw ICE attention, of course quite how that occurred was a mystery as this city had no Agricultural land.
So you would have been part of the Boris Batshit intake? Makes sense.Yes I have.
Runner up in a couple of Westminster elections, resurrected the SDP, wrote their manifesto and the policies that they now stand on and then was asked to join the governing Tory party. Opted not to stand when a / winnable safe seat in 2019 was available. (Thats how it works, it’s very rare you’re offered a winnable seat first or second time). I declined because I had a young family.
I was elected to Chair the regional Conservative Party federation in 2022 and am / was involved on Gov advisory boards / policy directives from 2017-2024.
So, no, I didn’t achieve being elected to Westminster at a time it might have worked for me. I may stand again in 2029 - not decided yet.
If your question was an immature dig, then that’s rather sad.
Clearly your political CV extends beyond being a rather boring keyboard warrior; let’s have it…..
I asked how they immigrated.You talk as though we don’t know why they immigrated. Daddy Trump tells you they eat pets so you believe it I guess.
That is common knowledgeI asked how they immigrated.
I thought it was the cat and dogsSeems many of the Haitians in Springfield are moving.
Begs the question on what basis they immigrated.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?