A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 695 of 725
Quote:6ix, at 45 years old, you don't work but are kept alive by government healthcare. I, at 72 years old, work and pay for your healthcare. For all you fat, dumb, lazy, hungover Trumptards who are a burden on the real workers of America, I hope Trump does boot all the illegal aliens out so you can take their jobs.
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
You really hate people who work for a living.
--------------------------------------------------
Trump is fine.
He is also your current President.
P.S. Most Trumptards I know who work only accomplish a tiny fraction of what Anti-Trumptards accomplish but they get paid as if they are the same.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here’s how wokeness hurts centrist Democrats
https://jabberwocking.com/heres-how-wokeness-hurts-centrist-democrats/
The problem is not that Democratic politicians are too woke. The problem is that too many of them refuse to clearly repudiate extreme wokeness.
"Defund the police" is as good an example as any. It's absolutely true that very few congressional Democrats actively supported it. But it's equally true that very few were willing to clearly and publicly oppose it. So what happened? There were lots of loud progressive activists yelling about defunding the police and they were met mostly by a yawning establishment silence. (Joe Biden was a prominent exception.) The public concluded, perfectly reasonably, that if (a) "defund the police" was a big thing on the left, and (b) Democrats weren't objecting to it, then (c) it must be something Democrats approved of.
There are dozens of examples of similar things. Open borders. Ultra touchiness. Overuse of calling people racist. Electric car mandates. Paper straws. Weird academic speaking styles. They/them. Word policing, which is hard on people who aren't super verbal and educated. Land acknowledgements.
And of course, in 2024, transgender edge cases. Like puberty blockers for 12-year-olds. Trans surgery for prisoners. Biological males competing in girls' sports. Kamala Harris didn't actively run on this stuff, but neither did she oppose it or disown her 2019 views. And it was probably a good thing, too. If she had, it would have generated enormous blowback and dominated the news for days or weeks. Look what happened to Harris in Michigan just for being squishily pro-Israel. Or to Seth Moulton for his girls' sports transgression—and that was after the election was over.
So lefty defenders miss the point when they say centrists control most of the Democratic Party. Of course they do. Nor is there anything centrists can do to stop hardcore lefties from saying whatever they want. But unless they want to be tarred with the lefty brush, they have to loudly and clearly oppose them—and that they're afraid to do. They're frozen in fear of taking massive flak from the righteous and their interest groupd. As long as that remains the case, the ultra-woke end up speaking for the party simply by filling a vacuum.
So is this why Democrats lost the election? I think it's part of the reason. But even though this is my view, the race was so close that I'm not willing to push it very hard. I don't see much concrete evidence that anything caused a huge turn away from Democrats, for the simple reason that there was no huge turn.
POSTSCRIPT: The same thing is true of Republicans, and as a result the Republican Party is generally tarred with the MAGA brush. The difference is that this doesn't hurt them much. That might be unfair, but it's reality.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
President-elect Trump has assembled an administration of unprecedented, mind-boggling wealth — smashing his own first-term record by billions of dollars.
• That’s even without counting the ballooning fortunes of his prized outside adviser and the world’s richest man: Elon Musk.
Why it matters: It’s not hyperbole to call this a government of billionaires. Whether it acts as a government for billionaires — as Democrats argue is inevitable — could test and potentially tarnish Trump's populist legacy.
The big picture: Besides Trump, Musk and his fellow Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) head Vivek Ramaswamy, at least 11 billionaires will be serving key roles in the administration.
https://www.axios.com/2024/12/06/trump-billionaires-cabinet-elon-musk
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Hollywood Reporter reports on the expectations of Jeff Bezos, the wealthiest person in the world from 2017 to 2021, about the second Trump administration:
“I am very optimistic this time around, I am very hopeful, he seems to have a lot of energy around reducing regulation, and if I can help him do that, I am going to help them,” he said, noting that big economic growth can help solve issues like the national debt. “I am very optimistic that President Trump is serious about this regulatory agenda, and I think he has a good chance at succeeding.”
As for the question about whether Elon Musk — who is Blue Origin’s biggest competitor, with SpaceX — would use his relationship with Trump to hurt Blue Origin or Amazon, Bezos seemed unconcerned.
“I take at face value what has been said, which is that he is not going to use his political power to advantage his own companies or disadvantage his competitors,” Bezos said.
In fact, he said, “I have had a lot of success in life not being cynical,” and expressed optimism about the future of AI, of interplanetary travel, robotics and other big-picture items.
“We are in multiple golden ages at once. There has never been a more extraordinary moment to be alive,” he said. “We are so lucky.”
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/jeff-bezos-wa
shington-post-amazon-trump-1236077799/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump's Plan to Make America a Global Bully
What happens when the nation takes a zero-sum approach to the world?
By David Frum | December 4, 2024
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/01/trump-foreign-pol
icy-isolation/680754/
In his first major address as president, Harry Truman urged Americans to use their enormous power “to serve and not to dominate.”
The date was April 16, 1945. Adolf Hitler was still alive in his bunker in Berlin. Americans were readying themselves for a bloody invasion of the Japanese home islands. The atomic bomb remained a secret.
Yet Truman’s thoughts were already shifting to the postwar future. “We must now learn to live with other nations for our mutual good. We must learn to trade more with other nations so that there may be, for our mutual advantage, increased production, increased employment, and better standards of living throughout the world.”
Truman’s vision inspired American world leadership for the better part of a century. From the Marshall Plan of the 1940s to the Trans-Pacific Partnership of the 2010s, Americans sought to achieve security and prosperity for themselves by sharing security and prosperity with like-minded others. The United States became the center of a network of international cooperation—not only on trade and defense, but on environmental concerns, law enforcement, financial regulation, food and drug safety, and countless other issues.
By enriching and empowering fellow democracies, Americans enriched and empowered themselves too. The United States has led and sustained a liberal world order in part because Americans are a generous people—and even more so because the liberal world order is a great deal for Americans.
Open international trade is nearly always mutually beneficial. Yet there is more to the case than economics. Trade, mutual-protection pacts, and cooperation against corruption and terrorism also make democracies more secure against authoritarian adversaries. Other great powers—China, India, Russia—face suspicious and even hostile coalitions of powerful enemies. The United States is backed by powerful friends. These friendships reinforce U.S. power. By working with the European Central Bank, for instance, the U.S. was able to freeze hundreds of billions of dollars of Russian assets after the attack on Kyiv in 2022. Russia imagined those assets beyond American reach; they were not domiciled in the United States. Yet when necessary, the U.S. could reach them thanks to its friends.
Americans who lived through the great tumult of Truman’s era understood that the isolationist slogan “America First” meant America alone. America alone meant America weakened. That lesson was taught by harsh experience: a depression that was deepened and prolonged by destructive tariff wars, by each afflicted country’s hopeless attempt to rescue itself at the expense of its neighbors; a world war that was enabled because democratic powers would not act together in time against a common threat. The lesson was reinforced by positive postwar experience: the creation of global institutions to expand trade and preserve the peace; the U.S.-led defeat of Soviet Communism and the triumphant end of the Cold War.
But in the years since, the harsh experience has faded into half-forgotten history; the positive experience has curdled into regrets and doubts.
Donald Trump is the first U.S. president since 1945 to reject the worldview formed by the Great Depression, the Second World War, and the Cold War.
Trump’s vision has no place for “mutual good” or “mutual advantage.” To him, every trade has a winner and a loser. One side’s success is the other side’s defeat. “We don’t beat China in trade,” he complained in the first Republican presidential-primary debate of 2015. “We don’t beat Japan … We can’t beat Mexico.” His deepest policy grievance is against those foreigners who sell desirable goods and services at an attractive price to willing American buyers.
Trump regularly disparages U.S. allies, and threatens to abandon t
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Trump's Plan to Make America a Global Bully
Shut the fuck up faggot.
The most peaceful 4 years of this century were Trump's 1st term in office and you couldn't stop fucking whining about him because you're a stupid little cunt.
We're done listening to you, so you just keep screaming into the wind until AI puts you out of a job finally.
--------------------------------------------------
Trump is fine.
He is also your current President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:6ix, at 45 years old, you don't work but are kept alive by government healthcare. I, at 72 years old, work and pay for your healthcare. For all you fat, dumb, lazy, hungover Trumptards who are a burden on the real workers of America, I hope Trump does boot all the illegal aliens out so you can take their jobs.
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
You really hate people who work for a living.
--------------------------------------------------
Trump is fine.
He is also your current President.
P.S. Most Trumptards I know who work only accomplish a tiny fraction of what Anti-Trumptards accomplish but they get paid as if they are the same.
Wow dude. You pay my $591 per year I'd be paying for a silver plan in the ACA if I was making $30,000 per year. I save almost as much on my Cable Internet bill by paying $9.95 per month for 50mbps instead of paying for their lowest teir $55/mo plan.
Meanwhile, I've accomplished what ALL Trumptards and Anti-Trumptards you know never did, and I bought a house with cash.
Nah, dude. I'm not going to be made to feel bad for not going out there and slaving away at some thankless retail job for a few bucks over minimum wage. Especially not when they're never going to offer me full time and benefits anyhow. I currently have ZERO ROI doing this. Let's not even mention the fact that I probably would still not be making enough money at one of these jobs to disqualify me from my current health insurance if I was working full time since the minimum wage in my state is still only $7.25 per hour.
The amount of people in my position are just about zero. How many single people without children do you suppose live in the country who are in their mid-40's that own everything else they need to live free and clear without any debts to anybody? In other words, how many do you suppose don't have enough monthly bills and obligations where they could ever afford to live inside a house they own without working enough hours that they'd disqualify themselves from insurance?
You're not mad at me for not paying for health insurance. You're mad at me because I'm a whole lot smarter than you are.
Meanwhile, I'm not doing anything illegal or even wrong. (And don't even fucking bother arguing me on this last point unless you want to be the "Republican" in the room).
Oh and don't worry. The US government will get that $591 per year back from me very quickly when I die in my 60's or 70's and the paltry $800 per month they're going to pay me in Social Security only lasts 5 or 10 years instead of 30 or 40.
--------------------------------------------------
Trump is fine.
He is also your current President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:6ixStringJack, you and your kind are worthless cowards. I am around Trumptards all the time. You are chickens. You are lazy. You lose your minds, jobs, families and wives because you are weak little men pretending to be the opposite of what you are. When adversity comes along, you Trumptards get drunk or drug yourself to forget. Or kill yourself when you can't forget.
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Trump's Plan to Make America a Global Bully
Shut the fuck up faggot.
The most peaceful 4 years of this century were Trump's 1st term in office and you couldn't stop fucking whining about him because you're a stupid little cunt.
We're done listening to you, so you just keep screaming into the wind until AI puts you out of a job finally.
--------------------------------------------------
Trump is fine.
He is also your current President.
Before Pearl Harbor, Republicans during WWII claimed they kept America safe from Roosevelt and his eagerness to go to war. The Republicans hated that Roosevelt was sending ammo to England and Russia for Lend-Lease.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/lend-lease-act
After Pearl Harbor, when Germany had declared war on the US, the Republicans blamed Roosevelt for tricking them into agreeing to declare war.
Sept. 8, 1944 (Notice that is many years after Pearl Harbor, but still during WWII)
BLAME ROOSEVELT FOR PEARL HARBOR; House Republicans Say 'Real Story' of Disaster Is Held Up Because of Politics
WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 (UP) -- House Republicans, focusing further political attention on the Pearl Harbor attack, today blamed President Roosevelt for the success of the Japanese raid and accused the Administration of withholding the "real story" for reasons of "political expediency."
https://www.nytimes.com/1944/09/08/archives/blame-roosevelt-for-pearl-
harbor-house-republicans-say-real-story.html
Republicans Never Support War. They have not voted for any War Declarations since 1942. What they have voted for are huge Pentagon budgets, which the Pentagon evenly distributes to all the states so that Republicans, the greedy moneygrubbers in Congress and out in private, want their share of and want a high-paying job in a defense industry.
But like Trump and his bone spurs during Vietnam, Republicans personally fear fighting a war. "I might get killed," the whiners complain. "I won't be free to do nothing brave nor significant with my life as is my preference," the Republicans continue and as 6ixStringJack has actually lived his entire life doing nothing because nothing is good enough for him.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Democrats’ problem with working-class voters is bigger than free trade
Most American workers have benefited from globalization. Democrats are losing ground with them anyway.
By Eric Levitz | Dec 13, 2024, 5:00 AM CST
In a recent post on X, the labor economist Arin Dube argued that “30 years of evidence” showed that “free trade policy” had led “many working class voters to abandon Democratic Party.” The political writer John Ganz endorsed a similar perspective, suggesting that Clinton’s free trade policies had caused “the industrial base of the United States” to disappear and that this inevitably cost the party in the Midwest.
Matt Yglesias takes issue with this narrative, arguing that progressives overstate the salience of trade policy to voters’ shifting allegiances as a means of evading inconvenient truths — namely, that working-class voters largely disagree with the left on immigration, crime, climate policy, and various other social issues. In this account, there are inescapable trade-offs between adhering to progressive orthodoxy and building a Democratic majority. The anti-globalization narrative invites Democrats to ignore these trade-offs by telling them, in so many words: You don’t need to be less deferential to progressives on social policy so long as you become more deferential to their views on trade and economics.
More at https://www.vox.com/politics/391059/democrats-working-class-voters-naf
ta-free-trade
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump Does Not Have a Mandate
He didn’t win a majority of the popular vote, and the idea that America has gone full MAGA is outlandish.
By John Nichols for The Nation | Dec 18, 2024
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/trump-no-mandate/
The big lie Donald Trump told after the 2024 election was that he’d won a “powerful mandate” from the American people. He hadn’t, and neither had his MAGA movement. The United States is, undoubtedly, a divided nation. But a majority of Americans who cast ballots in the 2024 presidential election actually agreed on one thing: They did not want Trump as their president. With almost all of the votes tabulated, we now know that around 50.2 percent were cast for someone other than Trump. That’s a small anti-Trump majority, but it’s enough to vex the incoming president, who has been at great pains since election night to foster the fantasy that he has achieved “a political victory that our country has never seen before, nothing like this.” His right-wing allies have been equally outlandish in their assertions that America has gone full MAGA.
Why are the Republicans so desperate to claim they secured a “landslide” when the results reveal that this was one of the closest presidential elections of the post–World War II era? Because they know something that Democrats sometimes forget: Politics is about perceptions, and a president who is perceived as enjoying the overwhelming support of the voters is far better positioned to change not just the policies but the trajectory of our politics. That’s what happened with Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s and ’40s and with Ronald Reagan in the ’80s.
FDR and Reagan had the numbers that were required to claim a mandate. Trump doesn’t. That’s why it is important, as he prepares to reoccupy the Oval Office, for progressives to unspin the narrative of the election that put him there. Yes, Trump beat Kamala Harris. But not by much. And the narrowness of the GOP advantage provides an opening for Democrats—along with a dwindling but potentially decisive cadre of rational Republicans—to block the worst appointments and most dangerous policies of a president who gained only a plurality of the popular vote.
Let’s crunch some numbers, shall we?
Trump’s margin was historically narrow. The president-elect’s 1.5-point advantage over Harris was, as a postelection analysis by the Council on Foreign Relations notes, “the fifth smallest of the thirty-two presidential races held since 1900.” Trump won 4 million fewer ballots than Joe Biden did in 2020. In 2024, if roughly 120,000 voters had switched their preferences in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, Harris would have won the Electoral College and the presidency.
Voters rejected a rubber-stamp Senate. Republicans retook the Senate with a 53–47 majority, but that was largely due to the small-state advantage that usually favors their party. Nationally, 1.4 million more voters cast ballots for Democratic Senate candidates than for Republicans. In the key swing states, Democratic candidates won all but one of their races, even as Harris lost every battleground race. That reality will weigh on the minds of the 20 Republicans who are up for reelection in 2026.
The House is extra close. Democrats started the 118th Congress with 213 seats; they will start the 119th Congress with 215 seats. If it hadn’t been for the extreme partisan gerrymandering in North Carolina, they would probably have retaken control. “The only mandate that exists is for Congress to work together,” says House Democratic minority leader Hakeem Jeffries. But if the past two years are any indication, Republicans in the House may not even be able to work with one another. Special elections—some of them brought on by Trump pulling House members into his cabinet—could reduce the GOP’s narrow 220–215 advantage, perhaps even handing Democrats the chamber.
“There is no mandate to jam far-right policies down the throats of the American people,” Jeffries says. He’s right. Polls—along with referendum results from “red” states suc
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME