Very interesting. However, what I found missing was the youths (supposed?) concern for the environment. It's one thing to support someone who they find non-judgmental, it's a whole other thing to support that person who promises to drill, drill, drill, and who claims climate change is a hoax.
People who want to blame mass social depression on economic injustice are usually just people who hate and want to correct economic injustice. That's great. I want to solve those problems too.
But it's clear that it's only part of the story, when you consider that things have never actually been all THAT great for working Americans. I would bet almost anything that the average Slovak working in a deathtrap factory in 1905 was less depressed than your average affluent high school senior in 2025.
It's the phones. Or, if not the phones, the things we do with them - the algorithms and doom scrolling and cyberbullying and all that nonsense.
I have said to my family (w 4 adult children) for quite awhile that I think algorithms are a huge problem and not just for politics but everything. It's doesn't get you thinking your told what to think because you accidentally touched your screen your forever in whatever world that is.
I think that is a valid criticism against the DEMs. However even if the DEMs weren't very proactive at least they weren't consciously contributing to the problem or outright denying it exists at all. "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." Voltaire
What this piece does not explain is the swing from more or less responsible government, liberal or conservative, to Trumpism, the blatant use of government to punish your foes and enrich yourself and your allies. Perhaps the problem is our two party system. If people, for what ever reason, have come to dislike one party the only choice is the other. A vibrant third party would be able to exert a lot of pressure on Democrats and Republicans, not so much by seizing power itself but by forcing compromise on the other two in order to gain its support. We have always dismissed the prospect of a third party because it would be so difficult for it to ever be ascendant. But perhaps it doesn’t need to be. Perhaps coalition politics is the way to go. I’d love a party sort of like the Dems but more pragmatic, without the heavy emphasis on identity politics and cancel culture, less of a scold. We wouldn’t win presidential elections but if there were enough of us we could definitely influence them.
People on the “left of center” don’t like to hear this but the scolding nature that became the face of the Democratic Party on “woke” issues really landed like a lead balloon.
Back in September 2024, I informally polled about a dozen Gen Z men on two questions: what do you think about Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson
The overwhelming majority response was “legit and reasonable but I don’t agree with all they say”
I asked how they thought the women of their age viewed them. The answer by all was “apeshit crazy”
Net net, the contemptuous denigration of men that these younger men were listening to did not land well
Just a very unscientific, anecdotal observation by a “well left of center” Gen Xer
I don’t really get surprised anymore, but it still disillusions me a bit when people say that’s the “left of center,” view.
No, identity politics is center. Left of center — we’re all labor issues, pro-antitrust, general economic and labor issues. Which is the patently absurd part — we’re the easiest ones to bring on board.
Neoliberalism, the mildly left of center, loves idpol. They don’t want economic change, or to try to sell labor policy — they want softer issues. It’s alienated much of the left too, just as it has you, it seems. “Left of center,” just wants civil liberties and equal protections. Same thing we’ve wanted since the 1950s. You’ll find quite a few very vocal critics of, say, DEI among the left — just for different reasons than the right has.
Left of center has been the single most vocal group critical of the DNC’s messaging — we’ve all said it’s elitist, it’s tone-deaf, it prioritizes feel-good rhetoric over policy, etc, etc, etc.
Take half-sentient loaf of Wonderbread, Ken Martin’s, spiel about how the DNC is courting “good billionaires,” as a case in point.
“Informally polled about a dozen,” I would fail you for turning in even a proposal to my research methods class with an n=12, for all that’s worth. That’s worth the bandwidth of conducting that survey.
That’s not getting into the known perceptual shifts with chronic Rogan and Peterson (and fuck Peterson’s hack, quack, miserable ass) listeners. They’re TOLD that’s how women view them by Rogan and Peterson. You’re not controlling for that. It lacks context.
This is some peak NIMBY, HOA Democrat ideology, frankly. Because the reality is — the left HAS been critical of the DNC shift toward identity politics. Recall that “the left” was among Clinton’s most vocal opposition in the primaries — for that exact thing.
Y’all drank the “left is the real baddies,” koolaid just like the right did, and it’s fucking absurd.
Nice work, antagonizing someone who likely agrees with most of what you have to say. And hope you enjoy an extended period of MAGA rule.
The only thing worse than the identity obsessed wing of the democratic parties are the Bernie Bros still delusional about the appeal of that POV. It peaked in 2016.
But whatever, as I said I am of the “don’t give a f**k anymore” Gen X 🤷🏽♂️
I get it but the problem is, if you don't give a f**k you are going to get f**ked for sure. I know, I know, you think you are already. But in fact you have no idea.
I see the “problem with the left” somewhat differently. I was an independent for many years because I felt both major parties catered to the interests of the wealthy.
I decided to become a Democrat to push for more regulation of Big Business and greater advocacy for the non-wealthy.
Identity politics emerged as the quickest way to reach working people in the 1960s. It was easier to point to obvious discrimination than to review the intrinsic contradictions of a capitalist democracy.
For several decades, American society moved leftward on that basis. Great advances were made and complacency set in. Meanwhile, the American ultra-right wing toiled steadily to seize power again.
While Democrats built a Great Society, the GOP created the greatest wealth gap in American history. We now behold the ugly fruits of their labor as billionaire oligarchs buy all 3 branches of our govt.
Identity politics are too specific to deal with the current situation. Explaining why billionaires’ interests are directly opposed to those of the 98% appears to fall on deaf ears.
Quibbling over who wants which approach is dividing and weakening the center and the left.
The only viable stand I can see is framing the message as DEMOCRACY VS ANTI-DEMOCRACY.
Solidarity behind a single, simple message is essential to stop the Trump/Musk juggernaut. I think everyone can get behind that message. We’ll even reach disaffected Trump supporters.
We have to hammer that message home, over and over and over on every possible platform and battlefield.
I have no idea what to do with the brainwashed 30%. I’m open to suggestions.
I don’t understand what you’re really trying to say. But I’m put off by white liberals blaming “identity politics” for the 2024 loss. First, why are you adopting the language of the right to describe the diversity of the party? Second, the Republicans are the party playing so-called “identity politics”— the anti-woke, anti-DEI, anti-trans, etc. platform is nothing but “identity politics.” That’s how Democrats should have responded and should have embraced its base. It needs to lean into its strength, not minimize it. Instead it ran from it. That’s their mistake! So are you suggesting that the Democratic party abandon its diverse base and only speak with a milk toast, don’t talk about diversity or equality narrative? That’s your solution? Good luck with that!
His statement about Covid graduates was accurate. My son blames democrats for that and he missed out on much. He went from Covid graduate to military. Loves Rogan.
I think the Democratic governors were more concerned about the health of their constituents whereas the Republican governors were more concerned about the economy.
My two kids missed out on a bunch of that stuff too. Here in Texas, Gov. Greg Abbutt went from shutting things down at first, to opening everything up, caving to business interests. Many people, mostly Republicans following the bad anti-vaccine sentiments blathered by the right , died from Covid. Even healthy adults, I know two of them personally. Thankfully, my two follow science, and have actively engaged to support progressive policies.
The fact that they took SO LONG to get our kids back in school was so frustrating. I understand the answers weren’t easy, but it is true the effects on our kids were terrible. I had 3, a 1st grader, a 6th grader, and a freshman, all yanked home in a very blue state. They were in two school districts, and my high schooler’s district was so obsessed with “equity” that they literally did not provide almost any education for a year because they worried poor kids couldn’t access it. My younger kids’ district worked hard to put together online school and my middle schooler had daily lessons form teachers online teaching in their classrooms as soon as they were about to get it going. He definitely suffered less than my oldest because of that.
My oldest still voted blue, but I totally understand why he isn’t a hardcore champion of that side. He just was able to see through Trump, thankfully.
There was this great article on substack that I cant find now which articulated the broad disaffection of the young male and certainly the young white male.
This is the primary audience of Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson.
The equivalent older male role model who is not dumped on by the "left" would be Professor Scott Galloway.
The broad "anti male" framing of discourse on "the left" is off putting to even those who agree with "the left".
"Those twin American obsessions, with race and with sexual self-identification, have something else in common. Each has its own specific and detailed analogy with Christian theology. First race – and white guilt over slavery and colonialism."
"The theology of atavistic guilt is directly carried over into the fashionable idea that all white people are automatically racist; all white people should feel guilty because they are white, guilty because of the appalling behaviour of slave-owning white people of past centuries."
An equivalent version the above exists in spirit if not reality about gender.
I am neither young nor white and a plurality of those young men I polled were non white and they were all students or recent graduates of "the best" institutions (Stanford, Berkeley, Columbia)
As such, young men, who likely agree with the desired outcome for a more just, more equitable, less cruel society are turned off as they seem themselves as the villain in this "left" narrative.
Thank you for this. I am going to have to study it because some of the ideas are new to me. I read a lot and think about many things carefully, but the world is moving so fast that I'm having trouble keeping up. I feel dizzy!
Older Gen Z here and the sentiment of hypocrisy is real. I don't agree with everything that Republicans are saying, but Democrats have a way of saying one thing, holding themselves up as paragons of virtue and then not backing up those statements with concrete actions.
Democrats don't seem to know the difference between identity politics and tokenism. I'm from a really blue state and when i was in school, some of the minorities represented on the school board and in local government were the ones who did the most damage to our school systems, impacting students in their minority groups. Doesn't make me dislike those groups, but I certainly learnt not to trust a representative just because of their identity. They were all Democrats.
couldn’t agree more, the DNC seems to be wrapped up in its identity politics by even not voting because there weren’t enough transgender candidates in their meeting. When are these people going to learn that others are not interested in identity politics any longer. My brother who was gay and eventually died from AIDS used to say that the way to gain acceptance was to just be yourself and not force it on anyone else. apparently the Dems haven’t learned shit from the 2024 elections. we need some new independent voices that recognize the rights of all individuals, stand up for human rights, but also have a common sense approach to the problems we face. 80% of the electorate is likely centrist, but they have no voice. Only the choice between dumb and dumber.
Sorry, but identity politics didn't even come into the 2024 election. Because while 47ish was out there with millions of dollars in anti-trans ads, no one in the Democratic Party said a word. They "concentrated on the economy." They didn't defend the people who were being unfairly targeted at all BECAUSE everyone kept saying "identity politics isn't what we need to talk about." If Republicans would let queer people actually be themselves, that would be great, but they seem intent on erasing them from the fucking planet.
Sandy, I totally agree with you in the sense that the Democrats were completely irrelevant in their response to those relentless attacks that shaped public opinion toward the identity politic issues , especially the hot button trans focus. what they should’ve done right from the beginning, was to take it away from them by saying while we support the rights for transgender people to live their lives, it is completely unfair that they compete in binary sports that have been designed around biology. The better stance was to kick this back to the regulatory agencies in sports and challenge them to create open categories for participation for those who choose to identify in whatever manner they choose. in this regard, they willingly advocated for things that a majority of Americans are not ready to accept. Worse, they continue to do so.
I think many are involved but not a serious level. Trump is a case in point. You didn't have to be a genius to know virtually everything he says is lie but he spoke with a basic, trivialized message to persuade enough uninformed or willfully ignorant voters he was a better choice. Many of these or at least enough of this people were centrists who in their mind chose the best of the worst. The Democrats or some political organization needs to have a strong, honest voice to push back but in forthright, meaningful ways that make sense to people. They need to show some honesty in their politics and stop the elitist game of picking the candidate they choose rather than what the people choose (see Bernie Sanders, Dean Phillips and anyone except Joe).
Got it. I too am intensely frustrated with the Democratic Party's stranglehold over its candidates, as well as its choices for legislative leadership. Well, and everything, really. Of course this isn't new. The only Democrat I have voted for in a primary who actually became the candidate was--wait for it--George McGovern. It really is beyond time for this willful blindness to stop.
Young people don’t remember a time when politics worked. If you are 18 now you were 10 when Trump came into power. You have nothing against which to judge his insanity.
I'm 53 and I can't remember when politics worked or that I believed that politicians actually cared about the American people. They are all about $$. Kamala and Waltz were the first that I felt like might've done something for someone besides themselves. 🤷
Well you’re in good company. The Dems’ own research for years has shown their broader base wants — well, most things you do. The other big consistent things are strong leadership, straightforward messaging, labor issues, making fewer compromises, and generally playing less nice.
Which…they’ve then proceeded to ignore for the last decade — cherry-picking what they already do, and saying “yes, this must be what the children want.”
The DNC is their own worst enemy. A day without them tripping over their collective dick, is like a day without sunshine. Their leadership truly needs to step aside. They can’t win elections like this — they’ve barely managed in the last 10 years — with nearly this exact strategy.
The GOP has been winning elections by manipulating the Electoral College, not by representing the will of the American people.
Decades of gerrymandering, voter suppression, voter roll purges, direct threats to election workers, and a massive flood of extreme-right wing propaganda shored up by Russian bots — these are not the actions of a GOP that represents the American people.
If this is how you think elections should be won, I strongly suggest you rethink it.
Most government workers are democrats. Republican president necessarily must disrupt them as these supposedly apolitical careerists have and will resist lawful orders and laws.
Democrats fill 20% more government positions than Republicans. But it’s a partisan leap to claim they will refuse to follow a Republican president’s lawful orders.
There’s no past evidence to support that notion. In fact, the smooth running of our necessarily large bureaucracy has been a reliable constant throughout both GOP and Dem presidencies.
No previous GOP president has felt any need to purge the government of Dem employees. Trump is the first modern president to do so.
Trump isn’t purging only Dems — he’s purging everyone who opposes him. He’s not looking for a cadre of GOP employees — he’s looking for employees who put loyalty to Trump above all else. He wants a bureaucracy that will blindly follow his orders regardless of whether they’re lawful or constitutional.
You are being misleading to the point of intentionally deceptive. As of 2019, only 26% of goverment careerists were democrats and that number continues to fall. Furthermore, the overrepresentation of democrats increases the higher up the ranks researches look. For anyone who is serious about this topic, check outnthe NBER paper "Ideology and Performance in Public Organizations" which covers not only how democrats dominate government but also how bureacrats create cost overruns when the president is from the opposing party.
Yes that's correct- and it's also the main reason why democrats dominate the bureaucracy and are more like to be promoted. However good intentioned the policy to prioritize college degrees is, the outcome is a politicized bureaucracy that's out of touch with half the electorate and intentionally undermines republican policies.
Are you suggesting that political ideology being balanced is more important than an educated workforce? The college degrees are generally expected to be relevant to the work being done.
One paper does not equal a consensus. And I am never intentionally deceptive.
Your post suffers from internal contradictions. You claim that only 26% of govt careerists are Democrats and that number is falling. In fact, prior to this year 44% were Democrats, 40% were GOP, and 16% were unaffiliated. Those percentages have remained approximately the same for decades.
You claim that Dems disproportionately occupy higher offices and that this doesn’t vary despite the political affiliation of the president.
That’s flatly untrue. High offices are routinely flipped to the president’s party — our system allows the executive to appoint his Cabinet and numerous other high offices.
Democrats do consistently hold a slightly higher percentage of positions than Republicans but every objective review has found this is due to the much more negative view of Republicans regarding the prestige and salaries of govt employees compared to private sector employees.
The only publication I found that claims Democratic federal employees have 8% more budget overruns under Republican administrations was the one paper you cited.
And that paper reported that this 8% occurs equally when GOP federal employees are under a Democratic institution.
So, these minor swings balance each other out.
Trump’s claim that there is a mysterious “deep state” that persecutes Republicans is a lie.
His rhetoric is always geared toward dividing the American people and falsely blaming his chosen scapegoats — illegal immigrants, trans people, DEI, Democrats, the mysterious “deep state,” etc.
His lies are too numerous to count. His ignorance of government and law is prodigious. His motives as president are limited to personal financial gain and Mafia-style vengeance on anyone who stands in his way.
His purge of our federal govt will be financially lucrative for him and his tech billionaire buddies but it will damage our economy and our ability to function as world leaders — perhaps irreversibly.
His purge will destroy a large, intricate, net nonpartisan bureaucracy that has administered to the complex needs of our large nation efficiently since WWII.
He will replace federal employees with highly partisan loyalists, many of whom have neither the experience nor training to competently occupy those positions.
Trump will direct and oversee the unraveling of this great country — all for personal gain.
His legacy will be massive corruption that will dwarf any previous corruption because he’s teaching Americans to ignore the law and our Constitution.
The ideology he leaves behind is simple, ugly, and anti-democratic — TAKE WHAT YOU CAN FOR YOURSELF AND GIVE NOTHING TO OTHERS.
This will not make America great again. It will shrink our democracy, our economy, our standing in the world, and our citizens’ standard of living — probably irreversibly.
I fervently hope Trump doesn’t precipitate the tragic end of the world’s longest lasting democracy ever. But it’s looking more likely every day.
Hi Lidia- I think you missed my other comment, but if what you're claiming is really the case, then why are 70% of donations from bureaucrats to democrats? I'm sorry to say this, but while it's true there's a lot of crazy Republicans, there's also crazy Democrats. Just because there's lots of crazy people in the world! Black and white thinking isn't healthy as it prevents building a broad coalition with a variety of members.
Perhaps the Democratic candidates are simply better. Over the past few decades, the GOP has increasingly nominated candidates with insufficient experience , little proof of competency, and pronounced racist and sexist beliefs.
Also, Democrats have usually had larger grassroots donation campaigns. The GOP traditionally made up for lack of grassroots support by relying on super-rich dark money. They’ve only recently begun to elicit grassroots donations from the MAGA base, but that is a largely non-college trained group who would be unlikely to qualify for federal jobs.
I agree that black and white thinking doesn’t readily lead to coalitions. But how does purging competent federal employees and replacing them with MAGA loyalists (or just not replacing them at all) create coalitions?
I’m neither deceptive nor a propagandist. Your data is simply wrong. There are more Democrats than Republicans among federal employees. That number has NOT been falling, although Trump is doing his best to decrease it.
There is no evidence that Democratic federal employees significantly undermine Republican administrations or that Republican federal employees significantly undermine Democratic administrations. This is deliberately divisive propaganda.
The fallacy that Trump attempts to propagate about the federal government being a mysterious “deep state” composed of leftists is a major MAGA GOP talking point and it is a LIE.
Your links are not saying what you're claiming they're saying. First, the govexec poll data is from 2015 and is not scientific. The 2019 numbers i cited are from peer reviewed research. Second, the pew research doesn't even support your position.
Ann Applebaum, in a podcast explained how Poland overthrew its facist government recently. They did it by 2 different parties coming together to defeat the party in power.
All vaccines, like all medications, can have serious side effects. But vaccines aren’t approved unless those side effects are rare.
Every medical recommendation is a risk/benefit assessment. We decide if the benefit of a certain procedure or treatment is greater than the risk of that procedure or treatment. Then we review that decision with the patient.
Of course, statistical risk is of little value if you’re the 1 person in 100,000 who has a serious side effect. After the fact, the risk was 100% for you. But unless obvious variables exist, doctors can’t predict individual reactions, particularly the rare ones.
I do not suffer from a one-sided or blind approach to vaccines or any other treatment. I invariably explain the risks versus benefits of treatments to my patients, not merely to limit my malpractice liability but because I believe the patient is the ultimate decision maker.
Perhaps my tedious habit of reviewing side effects beforehand explains my 45 years of medical practice without any malpractice lawsuits. Or perhaps there’s another explanation.
But I’m a firm believer in telling my patients the facts as well as my personal opinion based on my years of experience.
You are a strong proponent of the private sector. As a physician, I can assure you that the profit motive is not the most sound basis for a healthcare system. Deciding who gets care based on their ability to pay for it is inhumane and contrary to basic human principles.
However, I believe the private sector has an important role in healthcare. While they rarely provide the most universal service at the lowest possible price (the goal of most healthcare systems), they do provide innovation and speed of treatment at a very impressive level.
The COVID pandemic was a great example of public health agencies and the private sector working hand in hand. Our govt monitoring agencies provided the early warnings and immediate identification of cases. In fact, these watchdogs had been warning of an impending pandemic for years.
They assessed the efficacy of developing an acute treatment versus a vaccine based on the early data. Operation Warp Speed was the result of their recommendations to President Trump. The incredibly rapid development of safe and effective new vaccines is a tribute to our robust private sector companies.
Trump had a limited understanding of the medical science involved in controlling an epidemic but his initial response was appropriate.
Unfortunately, his political instincts warned him that he would be blamed for pandemic deaths if national hysteria took hold, so he began to downplay the pandemic, providing false hope in unproven remedies and reassuring the public that COVID was like the flu and that it would go away on its own.
This was a risky strategy, particularly as the deaths rose by hundreds of thousands. When Trump caught COVID, did he stay home? No. He wisely reported to the hospital immediately and received aggressive supportive treatment followed by a full series of COVID vaccine.
Yet he still feared the people would turn against him and blame him for the devastation of the pandemic. He began lashing out at advisors and medical professionals, including disparaging the same vaccines he had willingly received.
Trump even disparaged the use of masks and social distancing, techniques which are routinely employed in countries with high population density like Japan and China. These techniques aren’t perfect but they are helpful in most respiratory epidemics.
As COVID continued to mutate rapidly, it became transmissible by touch as well as capable of living for days on artificial surfaces, so the use of masks became ineffective.
The US began to fall behind other developed countries in pandemic control as the public, confused by the mixed messaging, became angry and polarized. Although we can’t rely upon the accuracy of data from Russia and China, the US ended up with the highest mortality rate of any developed country.
The CDC, NIH, and WHO did their part admirably in a situation not encountered in the past 100 years. The pharmaceutical industry rose to the challenge, creating innovative and effective vaccines and medication in record time.
The president was the only one out of step. He opposed rather than supported best evidence-based practices, creating a dangerous and lasting mistrust between the public and science in general. He refused the early lockdowns that would have cut the length of the pandemic. He unnecessarily spread anti-Asian rhetoric, claiming this was biological warfare from China.
Trump could have united the country in the face of this viral enemy but he chose to divide it even further. That was a grave error.
Of note: We still do not know where COVID arose. The revised reports that it came from the Wuhan lab were demanded by Trump when he was reelected despite the fact that no new evidence supported that theory. These are now political reports, not scientific reports.
It’s unlikely that we’ll ever isolate the exact origin, just as we haven’t identified the exact origin of HIV, Ebola, or Marburg. Natural mutation remains the most likely cause — nature is the largest laboratory of all. The number of mutations produced by researchers in one lab is dwarfed by the number constantly generated without controls in large animal populations.
Another point: The notion that masks are a useless infringement on personal freedom is a uniquely anti-scientific concept, one that was fanned by political propaganda. I can assure you that the next time you have surgery, the OR personnel will all be masked, gowned, gloved, and following proven antiseptic protocols.
It’s a bad idea. Firing longtime federal employees who have worked competently under past presidents from both parties is foolish at best.
Replacing them with inexperienced workers whose only loyalty is to Trump (rather than to either party or the Constitution) is a recipe for dictatorship.
Not replacing them at all will rapidly result in a weak, dysfunctional government.
No previous GOP president has felt the need to purge federal employees en masse.
It’s very obvious Trump wants to radically alter our government bureaucracy. Instead of a large, experienced network of people who enforce our laws and provide social services, he wants a small group of loyalists who will follow his orders blindly.
Trump wants to eliminate all obstacles to his policies and all taxes/regulation of the super wealthy. He wants his desires to supersede any laws.
Have to disagree. While I find Trump distasteful, the "pearl clutching" of "the establishment" of cutting employees of the federal government is nothing more than an act of self protection
In 35+ years of working with large corporations, I find that there amount of taste is monumental
The US Federal government is the largest "corporation" and the number of positions of sinecure is quite mind boggling
Yeah, I am socially well "left of center", have only votes Democratic in all elections (or voted for Mickey Mouse) and find it hard to argue with the desired outcome of the Trumpian cohorts.
I guess that is the regulatory libertarian that balances the social liberal in me.
We already have an extensive network of independent experts and agencies that monitor expenditures constantly, like the Inspectors General, NLRB, Govt Accountability Office, etc.
Unfortunately, Trump/Musk have fired most of the experienced staff at those agencies. Seems counterproductive, right?
Govt audits are by necessity slow because they require assessing agency performance in detail, identifying real problems, deciding where to cut or claw back, and implementing changes at a speed that allows the effects of cuts to be monitored.
DOGE’s manic wrecking ball approach is the furthest thing from that.
DOGE repeatedly overestimates the value of its cuts, makes enormous and repetitive errors in bookkeeping, is tremendously inefficient (like firing the entire staff of nuclear missile guardians and then scrambling to rehire them a week later), and despite much fanfare has only cut the govt budget by <0.9%.
DOGE’s “efficiency” is largely limited to eliminating agencies that regulate or have ongoing investigations into Trump/Musk businesses.
DOGE has also engendered countless lawsuits because many of its actions are illegal and/or unconstitutional. The lawyers that the govt will need to hire may end up costing more than DOGE saves.
Let’s call DOGE what it is — a scam designed to eliminate all financial obstacles to Trump/Musk and their buddy tech billionaires.
Eliminate DOGE and then we can have a serious conversation about bloat and waste in the federal budget.
Hey, I was an independent for many years because I felt both major parties cater to the needs of the wealthy.
I still believe that’s true but the wildly anti-democratic lurch to the right of the MAGA GOP is far more disturbing than DNC inertia.
If you think the Dems need young blood and fresher perspectives, I’m with you. I’m too old to run for office but what about you? How can you contribute?
New ideas don’t usually fall like manna from heaven. They’re hammered out by people committed to a better future. Become one of those people and create the future you want.
David Hogg’s insight is useful, especially pointing out the changing nature of cohorts of “young voters.” (I was once a member of the “youth vote” — 50 years ago😉)
But isn’t it ironic that we’re reading online about how screen time increases our isolation.
I welcome explanations of why so many people voted for Trump. Even more, I would love to hear some explanation of why he has gotten away with so many crimes. He should be in jail, along with all the insurrectionists he pardoned. I’d like to see Democrats taken to task for not holding him — and complicit Republicans—accountable.
When you have the richest men in the world putting out propaganda that they are right and everyone else is wrong, you get a felon who can be bought as President. Forget young people. They have persuaded millions of poor/moderate and well off Christians that think he was annointed by God to put white men back in charge.
Thank you. The reason they keep slamming their head against the wall & blaming Dems is because they don’t get it. They REFUSE to listen to what the real problem is…it is propaganda. Yes 30+ years of lies, smearing Dems, propaganda + they own ALL of the media now + Fox. It was a bad idea in 1996 & it’s still bad for our country today.
He had wealthy donors as do all politicians, but didn't have them in an office in the White House and they didn't have power to order government employees to not do their jobs.
You misspelled accurate. The shutdown of USAID causing a sudden defunding of progressive ESG NGOs is proof that they had no interest in helping people who actually needed help.
Sorry Charlie - as the tuna ad goes. There may have been some seriously wealthy people but their goal was not to shaft all of us and destroy our standing. Sheesh.
It would be an echo chamber. We need to get the truth to the other side. That is a challenge. One approach, since they like conspiracy theories, might be to frame the actual truth as a “conspiracy theory.” Then they might actually look at it.
This is a wonderful question. My parents are evangelical Christians and they watch Christian TV all the time. Apparently there are some that say he T was chosen by y God. I can't imagine believing that. But, I'm not them....
Virginia, fairly clear at this point why people voted for Trump or why many tradition Democratic voters stayed on the sideline. The negative economy, rising crime, the increased illegal immigration. The Democratic Party focus on trans rights for children, DEI workplace rules and light on crime community policing instead of the aforementioned issues was tone deaf. Voters, particularly working class and people of color, knew this
Susanus, none of what you stated is accurate in the way that it impacted the electorate. Perhaps true the rates of inflation, violent crime, and amount of migrant crossings across the Mexico border decreased in 2024 compared to their recent peaks in 2022. But that is meaningless to families directly impacted by those issues. Total dollar food costs, gas & heating costs, dining out costs, violent felony crime, amount of illegal migrant crossings all increased, some significantly so, from 2020 when Biden/Harris took office compared to 2024. Food costs alone when up roughly 28-30% during that time. Talking about how inflation is now back to normal levels doesn't help the family that is now paying significantly higher costs. Offering platitudes that crime is at historically normal levels doesn't help the NYC subway commuter that felt the safety impact of felony violent crime increasing by 40% from 2020 to 2024
Harris had significant headwinds given the environment even though Biden did an overall great job as president. Offering macro stats to try to convince the electorate that what they see and feel every day isn't true is a strategy that rarely works. It didn't when HW Bush tried to use similar stats to convince the electorate that the economy was rising and better than they thought. It didn't work for Dinkins when trying to convince New Yorkers that the crime statistics were improving and NYers should feel safer now. They didn't and voted in a Republican mayor in an overwhelmingly Democratic city
2. His inept "leadership" caused the stock market to be volatile
3. He lost 100,000s of jobs each month & 3 Million jobs in 4 years.
4. He pressured the FED to keep 0% rates, instead of raising it to offset inflation
5 He started a Trade War w/China & LOST costing us $64Billion
6. Suggesting we print money to pay down the Deficit, which would cause deflation & make the $dollar weaker
Doing those kinds of maneuvers doesn't show up right away...not until it gets down the road a bit & accumulates. Anyone who thinks the above type of hatchet jobs on the economy is immediate is MISINFORMED or doesn't understand how economies work.
What caused inflation was a lack of supply during Covid. Remember running out of toilet paper. That caused an increase in prices when demand is greater than supply. I paid $20 to Amazon for six small rolls of toilet paper and I was glad to get them. When covid ended there was massive demand for products but it took a long time to increase supply. Naturally inflation was up I believe almost 14%. Not Biden's fault not Trump's fault.
Biden got inflation down to 2% his last year thru deals made with manufacturers. He got no credit. These tariffs will raise inflation possibly double digits again. They'll blame Biden of course.
Yes it absolutely was, but what would a person who spews right wing propaganda even know about it? That is the whole ball of wax in a nutshell. For you to make that statement proves once again that your word salad you spewed is crap. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Look it up. Trump policies led to it, but yeah....you keep on blaming it on nebulous macro economics that you're using inappropriately in the first place. You're repeating talking points that you don't even understand, but go ahead....double down, pretend you're right & I'm wrong because after all...it's me saying it & not another white man. You're just another fascist enabler underneath it all.
Another contributor to the cost of living is climate change. I live in Southern California in a fire zone. The fires we just had are going to raise everyone's premiums, if they can get insurance at all. And healthcare! That's expensive because of the insurance companies (as well as technology). But no one seems to include those things in the cost of living figures. Whose fault are these things? Both parties.
Nope...that's reTHUGs. LOOK at the records & votes. Dem party ALWAYS did work on climate since Bill Clinton/Gore. Clinton did the Kyoto climate accords aimed at eliminating gases that cause global warming/climate change. Then Bush pulled us out. Obama got Paris accords 2015, Orange pulled us out. Biden did a big climate bill & now Orange Felon is trying to get rid of it. So no....NOT "both parties". Rethugs destroy, Dems fix, correct, look at the big picture. You need to look at congressional records which bare this out.
I agree that Dems are better at this than Republicans, but there are plenty of Democrats who have supported the oil companies and fought solar. My own governor Newsom has destroyed rooftop solar in California. And of course there's Manchin, for another, even though he's not really a Democrat. This is why I say both parties.
I'd argue inflation and prices would have been considerably worse under Trump if he won in 2020 instead of Biden. His tariff policy during his first term reduced expected GDP by at least 0.2% and required a $23B bailout to corporate farmers. He likely would have doubled down on tariffs in 2020 so he wouldn't be seen as a loser like he is doing now by backtracking with Mexico & Canada
Exactly. If all the news is right wing propaganda then most of the electorate are going to be very misinformed. Unless you are smart enough to put together information from a variety of sources your going to be misinformed.
“Right wing propaganda that you see with your own eyes on the ground instead of lying statisticians spewing BS on the approved news sources, that gets revised down two weeks later with no fanfare”
Harris actually spoke very little on the topics you mentioned, which seemed to actually lose her progressive voters. She spoke mainly about the economy, Women’s rights, healthcare, and taxes. Additionally, crime in the U.S. is not up at all, that is inaccurate according to studies tracking it over time. Lastly, our economy was actually doing much better if not well well by most metrics, despite public perception of it.
I agree, the Harris campaign didn't focus on these identity politics issues. Imo she did a good job on her campaign in an environment with v strong headwinds. My comment was more about the prioritization of the Biden/Harris administration (e.g., 1st day, Biden issues an EO allowing trans girls in school girl bathrooms. It took him 3 years to issue an EO about addressing the Mexico border illegal immigration problems)
You are arguing my point. Crime was absolutely up, as reflected in many statistics but more importantly, in the minds of the electorate. If you have to use stats to convince people they are actually safe when they feel they are not, you lost the election. Ditto the economy. Biden did an outstanding job in soft landing the economy. This also means there had to be a negative economy to soft land from! If you have to convince the electorate that macro stats show the economy is better than you feel in your everyday lives, you lost the election (e.g., HW Bush losing to Clinton). And who are most affected by homeless in parks, rising violent crime on subways, smash and grabs in Dollar Tree and Target? The working poor and people of color. Exactly the demographics that moved toward Trump in this election cycle
Clearly the perception of all these issues is heavily influenced by what people are told to be anxious about.
As you stated, if you’re constantly being told the economy is horrible and crime is up and stories are circulating about how awful everything is and how much crime illegal immigrants and unhoused people are engaged in, you probably will believe it. There is a tendency towards negative bias which humans are absolutely susceptible to. It can generally only be combatted with statistics, which I guess is unfortunately not very exciting. That’s something I think republicans are very good at — choosing negative, slightly nebulous things to blame on the liberal ideology, and then pushing that narrative for years while the democrats try to combat it with boring facts.
Truth aside (if there ever is a truth, because as you say, perception is certainly everything, and easily exploited). The biggest issue for democrats is mainly how to improve people’s perception of these same issues, and ensure that public perception is balanced, while their opponents attempt to continue convincing people that trans people are committing crimes against women, and that illegal aliens are not people who deserve rights, compassion, and an easier way to enter the country legally, but are instead active agents of chaos trying to destabilize the U.S. for example.
Just so people know. 0.6 % of people over 13 identify as transgender. Not really worth all this press, but anything about sex is a hot topic. I'm sure the number of men who beat there wives is higher, but not titilating.
You are arguing my point. Biden signed a transgender order literally his first day on the job. It showed the electorate where his priorities were, on identity politics. Not on food/gas prices, not on increased illegal immigration, not on rising crime
I agree with much of your comments and I understand your argument. But think you are an example of the disconnect from Democratic Party talking points and what people actually know, not what they are told to perceive
Cumulative food inflation in the US increased roughly 28-30% in 2024 compared to 2020. This means a grocery bill that was $100 when Biden/Harris started is $130 today. People aren't being told this by Fox News, this what they see/feel every week
2024 murder rate on NYC subways are currently at a 25 yr high. Felony violent crime on NYC subways increases roughly 40% from 2020 to 2024. People don't need stats to know that crime was an issue the past 4 years regardless of the macro stats you can cite
You are like the campaign person citing statistics that although the violent crime rate on NYC subways increased from one in two million to one in a million during this time, you still have only roughly a one in a million chance to be a victim so odds are still quite low you'll encounter violence and also crime is beginning to come down anyway so vote for Harris for more of the same
Ok, interesting. You really dug into some specifics here. I'd like to point out crime in cities and states can increase due to their policies while the overall crime in the country decreases. I don't think that's the root of what you're saying, though, and I don't want to go on a googling spree with you because I'm not sure it's really useful.
I think what I'm getting overall about your meaning is that you feel like, despite the "macro" statistics that Dems might use to combat people's anxieties and pain points, you feel that the establishment has a habit of talking down to people. You said "an establishment campaign person" would dismiss people's feelings of lack of safety or a bad economy by citing overall statistics.
I agree. The Democrats aren't great at simplifying their message and speaking to unify people. They love a moral high ground. They are very fact-y, and facts aren't fun, and they don't feel very empathetic or compelling. The current GOP is charismatic and great at utilizing fear to galvanize their base, which is why they've gained traction despite, you know, highly questionable morals (to say the very least).
So, the main goal of the Dems moving forward should be making people feel heard and seen while also being honest and transparent. Pushing back against propaganda but not dismissing concerns. We need strong voices who can cross party lines. We also have got to get money out of politics somehow, because it compromises all of our politicians, no matter their affiliation.
I live in Ky, so I think Beshear is a great example of a politician who might be that kind of voice. I also hope AOC is going to be a rallying point, because she really listens to her base and speaks to their issues clearly. Bernie has always been that voice, and he deserves support from the establishment.
Thanks for the conversation, by the way, it's been interesting.
Across the sample cities, the 2024 average homicide rate was about 6% lower than in 2019. Comparing the most recent six-month trends, the homicide rate during the first half of 2024 was 15% lower, on average, than during the same period in 2023, and 17% lower during the second half of the year.
In 2024, food inflation in the United States was lower than in 2023, with food-at-home prices increasing by 1.2%. This was less than the 5% increase in 2023 and below the 20-year average of 2.7%.
So what are you saying? Crime is up even though it's not because people feel unsafe. I never heard Biden say one word trans girls ever. Where can I find that?
Yes, the pandemic caused companies to not produce products. Remember no toilet paper? When the supply of products is low, prices go up. Eventually we can't pay those prices and stop buying. When demand for products goes down prices go down. Prices will NEVER back to pre Covid levels ever. Jesus Christ could become President and still wouldn't lower prices to level. Face it.
Actually crime has gone way down in the last 10 years, and inflation is now at a normal 2%. Prices are not going back to pre pandemic levels unless we a terrible depression like the 1930s and it looks like Trump might make that happen. Again, news is now propaganda owned by the Uber wealthy.
I think it's worth noting that just saying "the economy is overall better" is not the same thing as saying that people's lives are overall better. They may be on a macro scale (as you noted AJ), but the ultimate issue is that people are struggling even in a healthy economy because they aren't being cared for.
That misery is easily exploited by those who want to blame that suffering on a liberal ideology or Biden overly focusing on trans rights or whatever when, in fact, crucial root issues like unfair taxes, horrible healthcare, negligible gun laws (see reported high crime rates), and an incredibly low minimum wage are mainly to blame. Unfortunately, Republicans don't seem to want to allow legislation in these areas to be passed.
Well there is really going to be inflation when there are tariffs on Canadia and Mexico. Talk about food prices going up. How anyone thought Trump would be better amazes me. Trump even said he couldn't lower prices.
Rlitt, I notice your use of statistics is quite suspect. As per FBI data, US violent crime was lower in 2014 compared to 2023 (2024 numbers haven't been issued yet). 364 incidents per 100,000 people in 2014 compared to 373 per 100,000 in 2023 (and this was after violent crime numbers peaked in 2021 & 2022). Your statement that US crime has as gone way down in the last 10 years is completely false
Crime has been consistently going down since the 1980s, but the decrease over the past five or six years is due entirely to corrupt DAs not enforcing the law, and statisticians counting crime based on convictions and not victim complaints.
The republicans focused on that in the homestretch if the election. Yes, Dems overemphasize their openness to all, it’s that openness that trump and his campaign twisted into woke, trans bathrooms,etc. Dems never demanded bathrooms for transgender people. Republicans created that and propagandized it, it worked. Flooding the zone. I have four gen z daughters, they know exactly what they want. A fair wage, affordable housing and some kind of safety net that includes good health care. In my opinion, capitalism and the greed that comes with it are not a priority for this generation, personal freedom and being told the truth is what they want. We need term limits
Yes this! I told others throughout the election and afterwards. Harris focused on the economy, tax breaks for the middle/working class and small businesses, healthcare, and women’s rights. However, the right overwhelmed viewers with propaganda ads on trans issues and immigration. Unless the general public tuned-in to her rallies and interviews or read over her in-depth policy on her website they had a completely different idea of what her focus and plan was for while she was in office. So many people cut off their nose to spite their face by not doing their due diligence in properly researching the candidates and issues.
Agree with your comments Michelle, Haley. Think the focus on identity politics is from lazy strategy and driven by a vocal minority within the party. Although I think it is misleading to day to say identity politics like trans rights weren't a focus by the administration. Example: Biden 1st day in office issues an EO allowing trans girls in school girl bathrooms. It took him three years to issue orders to address the Mexico border issue (which likely drove the drop in migrant crossings in 2024).
If the DNC can focus on the economy (middle class specifically, not the poor), reducing crime, encouraging legal immigration while being strong against illegal immigration, then they can reverse the trends of poc, GenZ, and working poor voting GOP
There is a large difference between the middle class which is roughly $50k to 150k per year and the working poor which can be minimum wage and 20-50k per year for a household. Policies that supports one demographic usually does not support the other e.g., dramatic increases in minimum wages
Don’t kid yourself that you cared about any of the important issues. If you (or anyone who voted for Trump) cared, you would have informed yourself, and it would have been obvious that Trump wasn’t going to help you with any of your concerns. Quite the opposite.
The truth is that most Americans are doing just fine. They’re doing so well that they’re bored, and aimless. And this makes them susceptible to charlatans selling them exciting stories.
So someone convinced you that “the Democratic Party focus on trans rights” was a really big deal. And they played millions of others by zoning in on their emotional weak spots.
Voting for Trump was an irresponsible decision. I hope you get a chance to do better next time.
? Pretty clear by the post-election polling that the majority of the electorate definitely did not feel they did fine the past few years even if they voted Harris
1. There is no evidence to support their claims. Individuals can struggle, because that’s true of any time. But in general, Americans were much better off under Biden, even when comparing to pre-COVID.
2. Like I said above, those Americans claiming to be worse off DID NOT BOTHER to contemplate what Trump was offering. For example, he was promising inflation, so if your claim was that you didn’t like inflation, voting for him was an extremely strange choice.
So what happened?
All of the rational reasons are reverse engineered garbage. The decision to vote for Trump came first, based on psychological reasons. The rational explanations came second, because they’re just excuses.
The truth: too many Americans are pampered, adult-aged children. Their lives have always been easy, and they assume it will always be that way. So they don’t know or care how their country works, and they think it’s OK to vote for a charlatan like Trump just because he sells them the right line.
Disagree, it is clear that many families were worst off the past 4 years under certain type of metrics in terms of buying power, inflation, crime. Factually undeniable at this point. What you and I would argue is that the inflationary economic issues had little to do with Biden and the Dems, things (crime, immigration, economy) were clearly improving because of Biden, and Trump is a non-starter as a lying felon and autocratic disruptor of the American democracy.
However the majority of the electorate only care about issues that only affect their home and pocketbook. It's easy to worry about foreign aid and climate change when you can afford to shop at Target every week, many Americans can't. 2024 is increasingly looking like a pretty normal anti-incumbent election to me similar to Carter to Reagan, HW Bush to Clinton, Dinkins to Giuliani in NYC, etc. The electorate rebelled against the incumbent party of economic recession, higher inflation, higher crime. Happens all the time
I'd agree the majority of the American electorate are uninformed. But if the Dems want to be seen as a viable alternative to Maga, it has to get out of the FALSE narrative that Trump voters were stupid enough to be swayed by right wing propaganda, are racist, are sexist. That isn't the majority of Trump voters and it's not how he won
Some of what you say is flat out wrong. Economic growth was almost unbelievably strong under Biden. So anyone who thinks there was 'economic recession' is wrong. They must also have poor judgement on information sources (someone is lying to them and they didn't notice), and little interest in the topic, because it's easily verifiable.
Some things are contested in terms of facts, or mixed. Crime is down generally but the mix of crime is more complicated. Inflation is low but there was a period of inflation.
But even if you let voters off the hook, and say that they're just expressing their personal circumstances, it still doesn't explain the vote for Trump. On any of the issues you claim to be important, Trump was offering people something worse. Inflation is the easiest one. Trump was PROMISING inflation, and lots of it. So if inflation is bad, then it was indeed a stupid decision to vote for Trump.
But let's get to your silliest claim, because this is where the real point is: this was in no way a normal election. Instead, this was an election where one candidate was PROMISING to dismantle all of the things that have made the USA strong, prosperous and free, and a majority of people voted for it.
You don't want to see it, because once you accept this reality, then you realise that the whole concept of the USA is crumbling. But you had better face up to it. Look at the last few weeks and tell me if Trump has done anything that is designed to be in the interests of US citizens. He is appointing preposterous candidates to important posts, and stripping the government of expertise and checks and balances. It's a full blown crisis, and it's EXACTLY WHAT HE PROMISED.
So why did people cast such a self-destructive vote? It's because (a) they incorrectly thought it didn't matter, and (b) they were duped into thinking that culture war issues were exciting and relevant.
It was outrageously irresponsible. It was the behaviour of children.
Why are you spewing right wing talking points & lies. Dems did not stay on the sideline. The economy is/was roaring, crime was going down, & immigration was down. JFC turn off Fox news...they don't focus on trans, they defend it when it's being attacked. DEI was dragged back from the 60's by Republicans....you're the one whose tone deaf. Oh Dems are light on crime...OMFG really?? Uhhh which party put the criminal rapist in the WH? Was the criminal surrounded by other Billionaire creeps that were also Republicans? WHO is letting 1500 criminals out of prison? The same one that let 5000 Taliban prisoners out that did 9-11 & then tried to blame others.
You need to be deprogrammed because everything you wrote is propaganda....
This comment is a good example of why Harris lost. The disconnect between realities families were feeling vs the bubble talking points that the economy, crime and immigration weren't problems and anyone who thought they were getting influenced by Fox News. There's a reason why people of color, working class, and younger GenZ to Trump in historical numbers. Crime, high living costs, high transportation costs affects these groups the most. You can tell these groups all you want that crime & inflation is down but they will believe it only if they see it in their own households
Facts are facts. Crime, inflation, net illegal immigration were all higher during Biden/Harris term. This is indisputable. Anyone who says other is engaged in mis or disinformation. And post-election polling is v clear now these were the primary issues for the majority of the electorate. Biden wasn't the cause of the inflation and did a great job of having the economy make a soft landing. Crime and illegal immigration were way down in 2024 compared to near record peaks in 2021/2022 after the Biden administration started making it a focus in 2023. The electorate probably discounted the actions as too late window dressing for the upcoming election and not as defining issues for the Harris Administration
Uh you LITERALLY spewed right win talking points, ok. What you don't "get" is that Harris didn't "lose". You're still too busy trying to be impressive & yammering on & on about nonsense that has literally nothing to do with voters or who won. There is a growing consensus of election IT experts that have found some evidence of nonhuman manipulation with regard to the vote totals. There is also a very large amount of absentee ballots that were never tabulated...millions of them. So, go ahead & scream "conspiracy theorist", but if you ever looked at the evidence of 2000 & 2004 the evidence is like an OJ Simpson amount that proves republicans stole both of those elections & if you think Orange didn't steal the 2016 election along with Putin ...I have a bridge to sell you. Putin continues to go around the globe putting his dirty paws on the scale of democracy. They blamed the Brits & attacked them harshly until it came out...."oh wait...Putin hacked it". That is what you are doing right now. It's what MSM always does, & it's what establishment Dems continue to do, but there is a large group that is growing bigger everyday that's going to have a talk with the "pretending" reTHUGs didn't steal elections & attacking people that find this out & have it evaluated.
Harris ran a near perfect campaign. If you have a functioning brain....then you have to REMEMBER that Orange lost 20% of the GOP base that he couldn't afford to lose & those voters did not come back...contrary to belief. Then it was revealed how reTHUGs/Trump rigged the polls by adding 60 or 80 right wing polls into the average. He paid someone to do the same in 2016. Who rigs polls?? Why?? Well, you would ONLY rig polls if you intended to cheat & steal an election so you can fool the public into thinking it is "neck n neck"...they even tried to claim it was a "tie". Nope. It was never a tie. Msnbc knew it, but still used those polls like they were 100%. That's maybe like ...journalistic malpractice because Ari Melber droned on about that day after day, just like the right wing fake age crap & then the carefully crafted lie about Biden having dementia AFTER he proved to the NYT with a doctor's report that he did not have Dementia.
Hey I get it...this stuff makes you uncomfortable...it's WAY easier to believe I'm a hack or a loon, then to track down this info. There are election experts who've tied this all together on Spoonamore's page & he has some of the stats where they audited parts of the election. A LOT of people do not want to know this. The Dem party won't face up to it, but we've decided that we're going to MAKE THEM face it, because people are angry after working their asses off for the party only to be abandoned by them while we begged them to audit the swing states.
You can ignore all that stuff if you want, but if you want to call me a few more names we can get into a flame war too....your move. My point is that YOU think that you can glean some info to help win by using manipulated data, &/or blaming Dems or Harris, but it ain't so....it just ain't so. I see the white males jumping in the party with glee just like last time....thinking they can "fix" what isn't broken. It's a huge mistake, but that'll be on you guys later & we'll come at you with a vengeance about how YOU fked it all up next time, ok? We'll see how you all deal with it.
Now if you INSIST on blaming Dems or a Dem, I've got one for you. Obama. Obama put this thing in motion. Yes they are falling all over themselves to protect him to the point that the media Politico intentionally edited a video of Pelosi saying she wouldn't ask Biden to step down so it looks like she asked him to step down, & NYT, who have the proof Biden didn't have Dementia via his Dr.'s report continued to claim the opposite. As for Clooney....well you know he was Obama's fig leaf to say what he wanted to say. Obama interfered with our election by trying to throw Dem primary voters out & do a blitz primary suggested by dopey Ezra Klein. Joy tried to explain how "they" donors were trying to hamstring the ticket & choose a completely different one. If you're fine with that, then you didn't vote in the primary for Biden & that makes you biased & wanted something else even though you're not a Dem so then you shouldn't be weighing in at all if that's the case. Psaki, the Obama minion tried to shut her up. That is the braintrust at Msnbc. They lost over half their audience over that election. The Clintons endorsed right away, but the Obamas took days. Why? Because HE wanted someone else. Now ask yourself.....what if Obama had just stayed the HELL out of it??? Then Biden would've gone forward. They still would've tried to cheat, but Biden would've been tipped off by his many friends here & abroad. I know he'd have had an audit if we begged....because Biden always listened to his people. He got stuff for the progs they wanted & helped them, & he got things that everyone wants & needs.
Well you can give it some thought...you don't need to reply. There's a lot of things going on, but I watched this election minute by minute in great detail. It's as big a waste of time to base the 2024 election on anything, just as it was a fool's errand for 2016. We have no press corps.
I have no idea. It’s a problem. Ask a middle or high school teacher if they think the Tate brothers have influenced their male students. All my teacher friends have watched the influence grow for many years. My snarky comment is real men, with morals and compassion who have empathy and strength need to step up.
I think we have to bombard those silos with an alternative, more humanistic point of view.
Those silos are largely composed of right wing social media platforms, violent video games, corrupt influencers, and pseudo-patriotic podcasts. All of those vehicles can be used for positive rather than negative messaging.
I am a Baby Boomer and a retired engineer whose career was based primarily on working as a consultant to municipalities in three states. The one commonality was that all expected the federal government to step in in a large manner to finance the majority of their projects. Few were willing to raise local taxes or rates to pay for the required work. I believe we voters have created an entitled attitude to our lives such that we want the federal government to take care of our "lives" so we do not have to take responsibility for it. I believe we the people need to accept the fact that we are responsible for our words, actions and in-actions and that to do so we need to reduce the federal government programs, raise the federal revenue so that we pay for what serves us today and do not push that debt on to future generations, we need to hold all government contracts accountable to meet their obligations, we need to hold the politicians to the US Constitution and laws and to set term limits for all elected and appointed officials (judges, Representatives, Senators, Gov'nrs etc). We also need to teach citizenship in schools, including the concept of "thou shall not" . Trump and Vance are two of many that do not accept their own responsibility and their election falls on the shoulders of Mitch McConnell alone for putting Party above Country... and in part, the Democratic Party's unwillingness to play hardball.
One caveat lots of local governments wouldn’t have the resources for the big projects even if they raised taxes. And many states would have the same issue. Note the imbalance of payments among states. But the federal government does have the obligation to pay for things that state and local governments can’t do — the COVID vaccine development and distribution, our national highway and bridge systems. And frankly there are issues that may pertain to one location today but to the whole country in time (how to address climate change and vast changes to our water and air and infrastructure). Now I know there are things that states could do but won’t raise their taxes but be aware that there are employees writing grants and seeking programs to fund the needs they see everyday. Those folks are being stonewalled by their legislators but trying to serve their communities —lots of public health departments. You don’t mention which states or whether their legislatures are controlled by democrats or republicans but think about that and let us know who’s in control of the purse strings. It’s the same at the federal level. Average working folks and most middle class folks pay at a higher effective tax rate than the billionaires (I’m a retired tax CPA). And it’s clear that dems did a lot more to balance the budget if not pay down the debt than W did by giving tax cuts while waging war on credit. The 🍊💩 also gave a huge cut to billionaires and millionaires without touching the budget. Frankly look at who won’t pay taxes in this administration. We need to spread the tax burden equitably rather than blaming average folks and civil servants for being entitled. That’s like telling me I’m entitled because I collect my social security (and pay taxes on it and pay more for Medicare). There are lots of us out here who are willing to pay our fair share but not to let the rich slide. We were better off when the top rate was 90%
While MAGA followers rail against the so-called “tyranny” of the federal govt, a majority of them rely on federal funding, both at the state and individual level.
Most Americans don’t realize how lucky they are to live in the wealthiest country in the world. They feel entitled to govt services without any corresponding responsibility for providing, controlling, or limiting them.
Trump’s plan to dismantle the bureaucracy necessary to provide those services is poorly understood by his followers.
I just read an article that said Musk will be the first trillionaire and Bezos and Zuck are far behind. I also just read that several Congressmen put together several plans for helping Americans, and Musk, not Trump, told them to forget about spending money on helpful programs because they are not going to get the money. We are playing a whole new new ball game.
David Hogg has the passion and the intelligence to become a national leader. I’m 90 years old and the only political organization I contribute to any more is David’s “Leaders We Deserve.” I hope he wins the DNC position because he will bring fresh air to the democratic party.
Elected Dems should be mounting our own occupation of government, our own January 6.
Elected Dems should be marching to the doors of illegally closed federal offices, unarmed. That's where it might make sense to read a letter similar to this one.
Elected Dems should put themselves in a position to be arrested in jail for challenging the illegal activities of the Trump regime. Think Alexi Navalny.
Elected Dems should be willing to sacrifice their freedom to draw this line in the sand. They need to lead. Then we'll follow
Average citizens being arrested won't make much difference. I've been there and done that in Raleigh. Elected officials are the ones who must challenge Trump's illegal coup.
Unless and until elected officials are willing to be incarcerated, it's all just noise. Strongly worded letters don't mean jack shit unless they're backed up by civil disobedience.
If we actually had more than a handful of sitting Democrats with the slightest shred of fortitude, I’d agree with you.
The party leadership, however, is still sitting firmly on “when they go low, we just get high,” and precluding any of that. Probably because Schumer can’t bring a flask with him.
This is a great piece of real and strategic information. Ok a a boomer with kids and nieces and nephews in the older group and even a bit older I have to admit that I don’t have much contact with the newest cohort of voters. And we definitely need a way in to their thinking and voting positions before they get too settled. While I’m sure most of them would not find the exposed real 🍊💩 to their liking, getting the message to them is critical and requires insight and expertise. It’s doubtful that any of the other candidates has a clue so I sincerely hope David gets elected. Any info on how to contact folks (if it’s even still possible) would be much appreciated. Also if someone else is selected, contact info to loudly recommend a special position for David and others with his expertise.
Ben this is more of what you need to do. And David tell us how we can help you capture the hearts and minds of our newest voters for justice and democracy
The solution to the problem cannot be a distributed cultural movement to abandon phones — it must be for Democrats to stop moralizing and fighting a politics of propriety over niche issues that most Americans, even those marginalized groups that Democrats claim to speak for, do not agree with them on.
Hire Faiz Shakir. Then listen to Bernie and focus on pay, health, climate, college and guns. Let the young people know you care about what actually affects them for god’s sake. ♥️
Dear Lola, Thank you for your thoughtful response. I am aware of Bernie’s mixed status on gun control. As an advocate for a more restrictive position on guns myself, I agree that Bernie has sometimes supported gun legislation and sometimes supported the gun lobby. He began as a mayor in Vermont which is a rural state that has an old fashioned idea about guns. When I was young, many years ago, guns were thought of as a means for hunting for food not people and for protection against wild animals not one’s neighbor or the government or our children . That is still how many rural states feel. Anyway, Bernie has proven over and over again that he stands for working people and healthcare for all and a fair living wage and college education that folks can afford. I believe him to be a sincere advocate for the people instead of corporations. So I will continue to be a supporter of Bernie.I also think young folks are bright and often informed about issues that are close to their hearts. I think they are aware that Bernie’s position on guns has been mixed and that he has evolved as has the democratic party and the public at large. I respect your opinion and wish you the very best.♥️
That’s where you get into trouble….listening to what people say, instead of what they do. You don’t know Bernie’s real record & if you did you’d stop acting like he’s someone to look up to. I have some inconvenient news for you….young people have a LOT to learn before they can lead others, so this is the time they should be listening, learning etc…not trying to lead people without the benefit of experience.
Bernie owes his entire career to the NRA. He voted right along with them against the Brady Bill 4 times, & against the provision that allowed families of dead kids to sue the manufacturer. Now….tell me how we should listen to Bernie…on guns, ok. He’s also wrong on Medicare for all. Some people are going to learn how much better Medicaid is than Medicare. He still has people repeating his lies that UHC = single payer, but it’s not true.
How could I ever trust a leader GenZ or not, who continues to believe all these false platitudes that Bernie has spread with the help of rich republicans? I can’t. They need to be smarter than that.
I wish this younger generation would break off and form a progressive party. As a GenXer who raised an older Zer I really want to stop voting for establishment Democrats and start voting for these younger progressives that actually understand the world we live in now. And I realize a third party seems reckless- but if it has to get even worse before these old people (including people my age) retire and get out of the way, then so be it because what they are doing isn’t working- at all. They care about themselves alone and don’t care about the people they say they represent and serve at all.
The problem with that is it would split the left & we’d be stuck with MAGA. The progressives need to work with their not so progressive colleagues & young people need to run for office.
By very early in Biden's term, say March, '21, it was known, that those 18 and under were safe, for the most part, from Covid. Less than 1,000 had died by either the end of '22 or '23. Schools not only could have been reopened, they should have been. The main people who died, were over 55, obese, diabetic, and had heart disease, of one sort or another. They made up 83-84% of the dead,
Society could have come back sooner and we would be a better nation for it.
Sweden had proved it by the start of 2021. They never had masks, isolation, closed schools, and they had the same results, based on age, as anyone else in Europe or North America. They were in fact, a control group, and the control group proved, that unless one was over 55, obese, diabetic, with heart disease, the chances of dying were very, very, slim. Check out their data, am sure it is available somewhere on the internet.
Yes, but Sweden is different. They had a different tactics. The focused on slowing not stopping the pandemic. They did let kids up to 16 in school but no one older. But they weren't sure that's kids sick. It's easy to say after the fact. And we had 50 seperate covid plans.
They were very much the odd country out, without any followers, that remember. Yet, they fared no worse, for death and sickness, but much better for their children, in terms of learning, society, in terms of stability, and happiness in terms of outcome.
This is a popular but false myth about Sweden during Covid. Their response eventually aligned to rest of Europe. Sweden did try and resist masking and distancing in the early days. They saw a spike in cases relative to their neighbors which had stricter distancing & mask rules. By 2021, Sweden had mask, social distancing, and lockdown rules in effect. Sweden is actually a study on how masks and social distancing effectively addressed Covid
Sweden has always fared better than the US in healthcare outcomes, including overall happiness. This isn’t a phenomenon related uniquely to the COVID pandemic. It’s the result of less poverty, a strong national healthcare system, and an extensive network of social services.
This “tactic” was the correct response, and the one that even US Pandemic Plans called for decades prior. They were right. Democrats have to be able to actually acknowledge that at some point. Without a “but”
Sweden’s initial approach to the pandemic — no mandates, limited recommendations on masking, no school closings — was reversed once it became apparent that they had a higher death rate than any other Scandinavian country.
Sweden is a racially and ethnically homogeneous country with a strong national healthcare system, little poverty, and a reliable social service network.
As a result, Sweden’s healthcare outcomes are significantly better than the US across the board.
Sweden could NOT be a control group for the US due to our wide, pre-existing differences.
It is true that we have much more variation in our population, but that works equally well for those who are more susceptible to dying as well as being more able to not even know the disease is in one’s own body. Over the course of all the variations, those should, more or less, cancel each other out.
So, it’s OK for teachers and school administrators to die? Or the kids’ vulnerable grandparents? That’s what we were talking about back then, once we learned—over time—that kids were less likely to experience bad outcomes. Kids don’t live or learn alone!!!! Teachers decided they didn’t want to die, all by themselves. Plus, we don’t know whether kids who were infected will experience negative effects when they’re older, including kids in Sweden.
This was a new, unknown virus that trmp said would go away on its own. But “conservatives” created a ruckus at school board meetings—egged on by radical right-wing infiltrators with their kids in private schools or grown up.
I witnessed this and testify to it, but the media has already suppressed and rewritten the truth. And the madman who let Covid spread because he thought it would primarily KILL people in blue cities—is this something YOU agree with??—was elevated by the media and got away with murder. But “Biden was old,” and THE MEDIA installed the Insurrectionist Criminal to kill and injure innocent people again
This WAS known. The rest of the world knew it in the summer of 2020. Many US Democrats (AND medical organizations) were all publicly advocating for full school re-opening until Trump said so too, then everyone reversed course.
But all those students had teachers and parents who were in the more vulnerable age range. There was a long stretch where everyone I knew who was getting COVID was getting it from their kids.
Schools could have reopened sooner if people had been willing to embrace masking, testing, and ventilation. But bizarrely, there was too much opposition to the very measures that would’ve rendered in-person schools safer.
Through 2023, only about 1,000, on the lower side of it, died of Covid. The danger for the schools involved those over 55 who were obese, were diabetics, and had heart disease. That group encompassed 84% of the death toll. Children spread Covid, to some degree, but if one did not have all four of those conditions one was almost completely safe. There will always be some people, who because of their DNA are more susceptible to dying from any vaccine, the question remains, does one mess up an entire generation for a problem that did not exist for them. Everyone did not need to take extra care.
The so-called common cold is really a collection of either 30 something or 50 something viruses, which is why by the time we get into our 60’s, we stop getting colds, because we’ve had them all.
Having lived a life with a very poor working immune system am very aware of this, and while most do get sick, that is about it, it lasts a week, or less, and then they get healthy.
There’s no way scientists can predict the direction of a pandemic due to a new, highly contagious, potentially fatal virus that mutates continuously.
Public health measures to contain such an outbreak generally lean towards being more cautious rather than taking any risks. Why? Because every human life is precious.
Businesses can be rebuilt and educational losses can be made up. But dead people cannot be brought back to life.
The fact that only 17% of the dead were young and healthy means that over 200,000 young, healthy people died from COVID.
Add to that the fact that young, healthy people were more likely to experience non-debilitating illness and thus more likely to spread the disease to the one million older, less healthy people who died.
It’s easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. But decisions made at the peak of an epidemic reflect only the data available at that point in time.
We have known for 2,500 or so, that in most cases, when one has a severe infection/disease, if they recover, they rarely ever have it again. The body has built up antibodies for it, that tend to stay within the body, just for those occasions. The better plan, would have been to focus protection on those over 55, with the three main disabilities. That is a much smaller group, and more amenable to being persuaded, of what is needed to stay healthy.
Rounding up the children from school could have simply been avoided by giving those 55 or older who worked in it, a temporary benefit, so they that they did not have to work.
Does the *quality* of a human life not matter too?!
These are incredibly difficult questions and judgements, for sure, but the decisions that were made traded significant negative impact on quality of life - both in the moment and rippling down throughout the life span - for quantity of life. "Making up" is not remotely a simple task.
Public health is too narrow a lens to be making these sorts of difficult policy choices in isolation. This is why all previous pandemic planning exercises (completed in less emotional/emergent conditions) advocated responses like Sweden's.
Grandma or even Grandpa could be a problem, but might not be. Merely being over 55 was not in and of itself a major problem, it was part of a quartet of problems, which when joined together, produced a very bad reaction, that resulted in death for some, but apparently not all that had this quartet.
Spent some time in my childhood in convalescent hospitals, so was aware of what impairment could bring. Disabled people often need help, but are as much as they can be, for the most part, in my experience, fiercely independent. The child would be a problem in any event and the relationship would be different than a healthy parent-healthy child relationship. It would largely depend on the disability.
And it was Democrat politicians and voters who were more likely to shame and threaten the young people who called out these restrictions. Heck, some Democrat governers even encouraged people to report lockdown violations to a talltle tale hotline. So while Trump did push for COVID policies they hated, Democrats were more likely to commit overreach on the local level.
As an older American, I spit on any Gen Z -sshole who voted for the fascist because they didn't have their "prom or their graduation" during a pandemic. Here's my message to all such selfish, stupid -sswipes - GFY.
Yeah, so? Every generation has had their lives interrupted in some way - WWI, Depression, WWII, social upheaval, Vietnam, high inflation and interest rates, etc. They're upset about disruption caused by COVID? Boo hoo. People in the past didn't vote in a fucking fascist.
None of this is new. People voted in McCarthy — the guy who frequented the Nazi GAB rallies before the war and borrowed their rhetoric and slogans. They voted for Reagan, who outsourced the fascism to the free market. They kept voting in Strom Thurmond. They’ve voted for McConnell and Tuberville and Jordan.
It’s short-sighted to believe that MAGA just suddenly appeared with Trump. That malignancy’s been around a while now. Arguably since Reconstruction. They just kept rebranding and knowing when to keep things quiet — until they were able to get more power.
Problem ain’t Trump. He’s the mouthpiece. He’s the second coming of Reagan – the cowboy actor who does what his bosses tell him to do.
Problem’s that the GOP’s had that very cancer for a good, long time, and kept insisting the same thing “no, you, the Democrats, are the real problem, the real fascists, the real Nazis.”
Every accusation, a brand-fucking-new confession — but…I’m overplaying the “new” a bit. That horse was dead back in 1954, but didn’t stop them from beating it.
We really need to get rid of Citizens United and the two-party limitation. Get rid of the insane money and no more Pasty Boy politics. Open the forum to independent parties and the choices become more diverse, candidates will have to make real plans and have no option except to follow through with their promises. I for one would be delighted to stop getting spam to ask for money two dozen times a day.
It really is that. Money out of politics. Our founders were right — parties ruin everything, especially when we only have two.
But we’ll need the GOP on board for that. Because every sitting member of the government — has benefitted from CU, the lack of term limits, and, I mean frankly, Wonderbread HOA politics.
There’s probably a handful that, even as it sits, would be on board. But most of them — I mean, really. I can’t imagine Liz Warren, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, or Ken Martin even speaking those words aloud, let alone voting for it.
That is enlightening. But they have effectively voted in a dictator. The sitting president only cared for their votes. Now, he’s going to systematically destroy our democracy. I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who voted for him and couldn’t see how dangerous he would be.
As a high school English teacher, now recently retired, I used our non-fiction unit to expose students to the growing research on the cognitive, physical, and social harm an over-reliance on phones and social media. Many grumbled at first, but when given the opportunity at the end of the semester to rank the most valuable lessons, this one was always at or near the top. Particularly effective was their learning that Silicon Valley honchos did not allow their children access to smart phones and social media, putting their kids in expensive schools where phones were forbidden. What they took away was that they were being used in a way rich kids were being protected. It made them angry, and helped them understand how they were being manipulated by Facebook, Google, etc. purely for financial gain. Any teachers out there? Consider incorporating such learnings in your curriculum. We and your kids will be better off.
Very interesting. However, what I found missing was the youths (supposed?) concern for the environment. It's one thing to support someone who they find non-judgmental, it's a whole other thing to support that person who promises to drill, drill, drill, and who claims climate change is a hoax.
Why do you think they are so depressed?
I think David Hogg has identified it.
People who want to blame mass social depression on economic injustice are usually just people who hate and want to correct economic injustice. That's great. I want to solve those problems too.
But it's clear that it's only part of the story, when you consider that things have never actually been all THAT great for working Americans. I would bet almost anything that the average Slovak working in a deathtrap factory in 1905 was less depressed than your average affluent high school senior in 2025.
It's the phones. Or, if not the phones, the things we do with them - the algorithms and doom scrolling and cyberbullying and all that nonsense.
I have said to my family (w 4 adult children) for quite awhile that I think algorithms are a huge problem and not just for politics but everything. It's doesn't get you thinking your told what to think because you accidentally touched your screen your forever in whatever world that is.
Yeah that’s a little hypocritical.
I think that is a valid criticism against the DEMs. However even if the DEMs weren't very proactive at least they weren't consciously contributing to the problem or outright denying it exists at all. "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." Voltaire
What this piece does not explain is the swing from more or less responsible government, liberal or conservative, to Trumpism, the blatant use of government to punish your foes and enrich yourself and your allies. Perhaps the problem is our two party system. If people, for what ever reason, have come to dislike one party the only choice is the other. A vibrant third party would be able to exert a lot of pressure on Democrats and Republicans, not so much by seizing power itself but by forcing compromise on the other two in order to gain its support. We have always dismissed the prospect of a third party because it would be so difficult for it to ever be ascendant. But perhaps it doesn’t need to be. Perhaps coalition politics is the way to go. I’d love a party sort of like the Dems but more pragmatic, without the heavy emphasis on identity politics and cancel culture, less of a scold. We wouldn’t win presidential elections but if there were enough of us we could definitely influence them.
People on the “left of center” don’t like to hear this but the scolding nature that became the face of the Democratic Party on “woke” issues really landed like a lead balloon.
Back in September 2024, I informally polled about a dozen Gen Z men on two questions: what do you think about Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson
The overwhelming majority response was “legit and reasonable but I don’t agree with all they say”
I asked how they thought the women of their age viewed them. The answer by all was “apeshit crazy”
Net net, the contemptuous denigration of men that these younger men were listening to did not land well
Just a very unscientific, anecdotal observation by a “well left of center” Gen Xer
I don’t really get surprised anymore, but it still disillusions me a bit when people say that’s the “left of center,” view.
No, identity politics is center. Left of center — we’re all labor issues, pro-antitrust, general economic and labor issues. Which is the patently absurd part — we’re the easiest ones to bring on board.
Neoliberalism, the mildly left of center, loves idpol. They don’t want economic change, or to try to sell labor policy — they want softer issues. It’s alienated much of the left too, just as it has you, it seems. “Left of center,” just wants civil liberties and equal protections. Same thing we’ve wanted since the 1950s. You’ll find quite a few very vocal critics of, say, DEI among the left — just for different reasons than the right has.
Left of center has been the single most vocal group critical of the DNC’s messaging — we’ve all said it’s elitist, it’s tone-deaf, it prioritizes feel-good rhetoric over policy, etc, etc, etc.
Take half-sentient loaf of Wonderbread, Ken Martin’s, spiel about how the DNC is courting “good billionaires,” as a case in point.
“Informally polled about a dozen,” I would fail you for turning in even a proposal to my research methods class with an n=12, for all that’s worth. That’s worth the bandwidth of conducting that survey.
That’s not getting into the known perceptual shifts with chronic Rogan and Peterson (and fuck Peterson’s hack, quack, miserable ass) listeners. They’re TOLD that’s how women view them by Rogan and Peterson. You’re not controlling for that. It lacks context.
This is some peak NIMBY, HOA Democrat ideology, frankly. Because the reality is — the left HAS been critical of the DNC shift toward identity politics. Recall that “the left” was among Clinton’s most vocal opposition in the primaries — for that exact thing.
Y’all drank the “left is the real baddies,” koolaid just like the right did, and it’s fucking absurd.
Nice work, antagonizing someone who likely agrees with most of what you have to say. And hope you enjoy an extended period of MAGA rule.
The only thing worse than the identity obsessed wing of the democratic parties are the Bernie Bros still delusional about the appeal of that POV. It peaked in 2016.
But whatever, as I said I am of the “don’t give a f**k anymore” Gen X 🤷🏽♂️
"Nice work, antagonizing someone who likely agrees with most of what you have to say. And hope you enjoy an extended period of MAGA rule."
That's what they do. It's why the self-gatekept online "left" will always be 100% useless, to Democrats and to our political system generally.
Truly a pathetic political movement, and largely astroturfed by internet trolls who are actively trying to siphon votes from Democrats.
I get it but the problem is, if you don't give a f**k you are going to get f**ked for sure. I know, I know, you think you are already. But in fact you have no idea.
Thank you. I try.
I see the “problem with the left” somewhat differently. I was an independent for many years because I felt both major parties catered to the interests of the wealthy.
I decided to become a Democrat to push for more regulation of Big Business and greater advocacy for the non-wealthy.
Identity politics emerged as the quickest way to reach working people in the 1960s. It was easier to point to obvious discrimination than to review the intrinsic contradictions of a capitalist democracy.
For several decades, American society moved leftward on that basis. Great advances were made and complacency set in. Meanwhile, the American ultra-right wing toiled steadily to seize power again.
While Democrats built a Great Society, the GOP created the greatest wealth gap in American history. We now behold the ugly fruits of their labor as billionaire oligarchs buy all 3 branches of our govt.
Identity politics are too specific to deal with the current situation. Explaining why billionaires’ interests are directly opposed to those of the 98% appears to fall on deaf ears.
Quibbling over who wants which approach is dividing and weakening the center and the left.
The only viable stand I can see is framing the message as DEMOCRACY VS ANTI-DEMOCRACY.
Solidarity behind a single, simple message is essential to stop the Trump/Musk juggernaut. I think everyone can get behind that message. We’ll even reach disaffected Trump supporters.
We have to hammer that message home, over and over and over on every possible platform and battlefield.
I have no idea what to do with the brainwashed 30%. I’m open to suggestions.
I don’t understand what you’re really trying to say. But I’m put off by white liberals blaming “identity politics” for the 2024 loss. First, why are you adopting the language of the right to describe the diversity of the party? Second, the Republicans are the party playing so-called “identity politics”— the anti-woke, anti-DEI, anti-trans, etc. platform is nothing but “identity politics.” That’s how Democrats should have responded and should have embraced its base. It needs to lean into its strength, not minimize it. Instead it ran from it. That’s their mistake! So are you suggesting that the Democratic party abandon its diverse base and only speak with a milk toast, don’t talk about diversity or equality narrative? That’s your solution? Good luck with that!
His statement about Covid graduates was accurate. My son blames democrats for that and he missed out on much. He went from Covid graduate to military. Loves Rogan.
How are are Dems to blame when Trump was the president at the time?
I think the Democratic governors were more concerned about the health of their constituents whereas the Republican governors were more concerned about the economy.
Does your son give Democrats any credit for saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of grandparents?
My two kids missed out on a bunch of that stuff too. Here in Texas, Gov. Greg Abbutt went from shutting things down at first, to opening everything up, caving to business interests. Many people, mostly Republicans following the bad anti-vaccine sentiments blathered by the right , died from Covid. Even healthy adults, I know two of them personally. Thankfully, my two follow science, and have actively engaged to support progressive policies.
The fact that they took SO LONG to get our kids back in school was so frustrating. I understand the answers weren’t easy, but it is true the effects on our kids were terrible. I had 3, a 1st grader, a 6th grader, and a freshman, all yanked home in a very blue state. They were in two school districts, and my high schooler’s district was so obsessed with “equity” that they literally did not provide almost any education for a year because they worried poor kids couldn’t access it. My younger kids’ district worked hard to put together online school and my middle schooler had daily lessons form teachers online teaching in their classrooms as soon as they were about to get it going. He definitely suffered less than my oldest because of that.
My oldest still voted blue, but I totally understand why he isn’t a hardcore champion of that side. He just was able to see through Trump, thankfully.
I would like to hear more about this. I don't know any Gen Z people personally and am having a hard time understanding these issues. Thanks!
There was this great article on substack that I cant find now which articulated the broad disaffection of the young male and certainly the young white male.
This is the primary audience of Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson.
The equivalent older male role model who is not dumped on by the "left" would be Professor Scott Galloway.
The broad "anti male" framing of discourse on "the left" is off putting to even those who agree with "the left".
Richard Dawkins in a recent blog post (https://richarddawkins.substack.com/p/is-the-male-female-divide-a-social) said:
"Those twin American obsessions, with race and with sexual self-identification, have something else in common. Each has its own specific and detailed analogy with Christian theology. First race – and white guilt over slavery and colonialism."
"The theology of atavistic guilt is directly carried over into the fashionable idea that all white people are automatically racist; all white people should feel guilty because they are white, guilty because of the appalling behaviour of slave-owning white people of past centuries."
An equivalent version the above exists in spirit if not reality about gender.
I am neither young nor white and a plurality of those young men I polled were non white and they were all students or recent graduates of "the best" institutions (Stanford, Berkeley, Columbia)
As such, young men, who likely agree with the desired outcome for a more just, more equitable, less cruel society are turned off as they seem themselves as the villain in this "left" narrative.
Thank you for this. I am going to have to study it because some of the ideas are new to me. I read a lot and think about many things carefully, but the world is moving so fast that I'm having trouble keeping up. I feel dizzy!
Older Gen Z here and the sentiment of hypocrisy is real. I don't agree with everything that Republicans are saying, but Democrats have a way of saying one thing, holding themselves up as paragons of virtue and then not backing up those statements with concrete actions.
Democrats don't seem to know the difference between identity politics and tokenism. I'm from a really blue state and when i was in school, some of the minorities represented on the school board and in local government were the ones who did the most damage to our school systems, impacting students in their minority groups. Doesn't make me dislike those groups, but I certainly learnt not to trust a representative just because of their identity. They were all Democrats.
What kinds of things did they do?
couldn’t agree more, the DNC seems to be wrapped up in its identity politics by even not voting because there weren’t enough transgender candidates in their meeting. When are these people going to learn that others are not interested in identity politics any longer. My brother who was gay and eventually died from AIDS used to say that the way to gain acceptance was to just be yourself and not force it on anyone else. apparently the Dems haven’t learned shit from the 2024 elections. we need some new independent voices that recognize the rights of all individuals, stand up for human rights, but also have a common sense approach to the problems we face. 80% of the electorate is likely centrist, but they have no voice. Only the choice between dumb and dumber.
Sorry, but identity politics didn't even come into the 2024 election. Because while 47ish was out there with millions of dollars in anti-trans ads, no one in the Democratic Party said a word. They "concentrated on the economy." They didn't defend the people who were being unfairly targeted at all BECAUSE everyone kept saying "identity politics isn't what we need to talk about." If Republicans would let queer people actually be themselves, that would be great, but they seem intent on erasing them from the fucking planet.
Sandy, I totally agree with you in the sense that the Democrats were completely irrelevant in their response to those relentless attacks that shaped public opinion toward the identity politic issues , especially the hot button trans focus. what they should’ve done right from the beginning, was to take it away from them by saying while we support the rights for transgender people to live their lives, it is completely unfair that they compete in binary sports that have been designed around biology. The better stance was to kick this back to the regulatory agencies in sports and challenge them to create open categories for participation for those who choose to identify in whatever manner they choose. in this regard, they willingly advocated for things that a majority of Americans are not ready to accept. Worse, they continue to do so.
That's an interesting idea. Do you think it would solve the problems we're seeing?
Malarkey.
No democrats stood up for marginalized people during the election?
You weren’t paying attention.
Young people didn’t pay attention bc they were all butthurt at the democrats for what, exactly?
You say Dems want perfection. Not true. They want the govt to function.
For generations, young people have complained that adults don’t understand them. This isn’t new.
James, don't you think that if that 80% feel they have no voice they should get involved? Isn't that what democracy is supposed to be about?
Hi Paula,
I think many are involved but not a serious level. Trump is a case in point. You didn't have to be a genius to know virtually everything he says is lie but he spoke with a basic, trivialized message to persuade enough uninformed or willfully ignorant voters he was a better choice. Many of these or at least enough of this people were centrists who in their mind chose the best of the worst. The Democrats or some political organization needs to have a strong, honest voice to push back but in forthright, meaningful ways that make sense to people. They need to show some honesty in their politics and stop the elitist game of picking the candidate they choose rather than what the people choose (see Bernie Sanders, Dean Phillips and anyone except Joe).
Got it. I too am intensely frustrated with the Democratic Party's stranglehold over its candidates, as well as its choices for legislative leadership. Well, and everything, really. Of course this isn't new. The only Democrat I have voted for in a primary who actually became the candidate was--wait for it--George McGovern. It really is beyond time for this willful blindness to stop.
Young people don’t remember a time when politics worked. If you are 18 now you were 10 when Trump came into power. You have nothing against which to judge his insanity.
I'm 53 and I can't remember when politics worked or that I believed that politicians actually cared about the American people. They are all about $$. Kamala and Waltz were the first that I felt like might've done something for someone besides themselves. 🤷
Well you’re in good company. The Dems’ own research for years has shown their broader base wants — well, most things you do. The other big consistent things are strong leadership, straightforward messaging, labor issues, making fewer compromises, and generally playing less nice.
Which…they’ve then proceeded to ignore for the last decade — cherry-picking what they already do, and saying “yes, this must be what the children want.”
The DNC is their own worst enemy. A day without them tripping over their collective dick, is like a day without sunshine. Their leadership truly needs to step aside. They can’t win elections like this — they’ve barely managed in the last 10 years — with nearly this exact strategy.
The GOP has been winning elections by manipulating the Electoral College, not by representing the will of the American people.
Decades of gerrymandering, voter suppression, voter roll purges, direct threats to election workers, and a massive flood of extreme-right wing propaganda shored up by Russian bots — these are not the actions of a GOP that represents the American people.
If this is how you think elections should be won, I strongly suggest you rethink it.
Most government workers are democrats. Republican president necessarily must disrupt them as these supposedly apolitical careerists have and will resist lawful orders and laws.
Democrats fill 20% more government positions than Republicans. But it’s a partisan leap to claim they will refuse to follow a Republican president’s lawful orders.
There’s no past evidence to support that notion. In fact, the smooth running of our necessarily large bureaucracy has been a reliable constant throughout both GOP and Dem presidencies.
No previous GOP president has felt any need to purge the government of Dem employees. Trump is the first modern president to do so.
Trump isn’t purging only Dems — he’s purging everyone who opposes him. He’s not looking for a cadre of GOP employees — he’s looking for employees who put loyalty to Trump above all else. He wants a bureaucracy that will blindly follow his orders regardless of whether they’re lawful or constitutional.
You are being misleading to the point of intentionally deceptive. As of 2019, only 26% of goverment careerists were democrats and that number continues to fall. Furthermore, the overrepresentation of democrats increases the higher up the ranks researches look. For anyone who is serious about this topic, check outnthe NBER paper "Ideology and Performance in Public Organizations" which covers not only how democrats dominate government but also how bureacrats create cost overruns when the president is from the opposing party.
These government positions require a college degree and people with college degrees do tend to vote Democrat.
Yes that's correct- and it's also the main reason why democrats dominate the bureaucracy and are more like to be promoted. However good intentioned the policy to prioritize college degrees is, the outcome is a politicized bureaucracy that's out of touch with half the electorate and intentionally undermines republican policies.
Are you suggesting that political ideology being balanced is more important than an educated workforce? The college degrees are generally expected to be relevant to the work being done.
Policies,really!
One paper does not equal a consensus. And I am never intentionally deceptive.
Your post suffers from internal contradictions. You claim that only 26% of govt careerists are Democrats and that number is falling. In fact, prior to this year 44% were Democrats, 40% were GOP, and 16% were unaffiliated. Those percentages have remained approximately the same for decades.
You claim that Dems disproportionately occupy higher offices and that this doesn’t vary despite the political affiliation of the president.
That’s flatly untrue. High offices are routinely flipped to the president’s party — our system allows the executive to appoint his Cabinet and numerous other high offices.
Democrats do consistently hold a slightly higher percentage of positions than Republicans but every objective review has found this is due to the much more negative view of Republicans regarding the prestige and salaries of govt employees compared to private sector employees.
The only publication I found that claims Democratic federal employees have 8% more budget overruns under Republican administrations was the one paper you cited.
And that paper reported that this 8% occurs equally when GOP federal employees are under a Democratic institution.
So, these minor swings balance each other out.
Trump’s claim that there is a mysterious “deep state” that persecutes Republicans is a lie.
His rhetoric is always geared toward dividing the American people and falsely blaming his chosen scapegoats — illegal immigrants, trans people, DEI, Democrats, the mysterious “deep state,” etc.
His lies are too numerous to count. His ignorance of government and law is prodigious. His motives as president are limited to personal financial gain and Mafia-style vengeance on anyone who stands in his way.
His purge of our federal govt will be financially lucrative for him and his tech billionaire buddies but it will damage our economy and our ability to function as world leaders — perhaps irreversibly.
His purge will destroy a large, intricate, net nonpartisan bureaucracy that has administered to the complex needs of our large nation efficiently since WWII.
He will replace federal employees with highly partisan loyalists, many of whom have neither the experience nor training to competently occupy those positions.
Trump will direct and oversee the unraveling of this great country — all for personal gain.
His legacy will be massive corruption that will dwarf any previous corruption because he’s teaching Americans to ignore the law and our Constitution.
The ideology he leaves behind is simple, ugly, and anti-democratic — TAKE WHAT YOU CAN FOR YOURSELF AND GIVE NOTHING TO OTHERS.
This will not make America great again. It will shrink our democracy, our economy, our standing in the world, and our citizens’ standard of living — probably irreversibly.
I fervently hope Trump doesn’t precipitate the tragic end of the world’s longest lasting democracy ever. But it’s looking more likely every day.
https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2015/08/there-are-more-republicans-federal-government-you-might-think/119138/
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/02/13/confidence-in-federal-civil-servants-remains-far-lower-among-republicans-than-democrats/
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/02/14/most-americans-say-it-would-be-too-risky-to-give-presidents-including-trump-more-power/
So any
Hi Lidia- I think you missed my other comment, but if what you're claiming is really the case, then why are 70% of donations from bureaucrats to democrats? I'm sorry to say this, but while it's true there's a lot of crazy Republicans, there's also crazy Democrats. Just because there's lots of crazy people in the world! Black and white thinking isn't healthy as it prevents building a broad coalition with a variety of members.
Perhaps the Democratic candidates are simply better. Over the past few decades, the GOP has increasingly nominated candidates with insufficient experience , little proof of competency, and pronounced racist and sexist beliefs.
Also, Democrats have usually had larger grassroots donation campaigns. The GOP traditionally made up for lack of grassroots support by relying on super-rich dark money. They’ve only recently begun to elicit grassroots donations from the MAGA base, but that is a largely non-college trained group who would be unlikely to qualify for federal jobs.
I agree that black and white thinking doesn’t readily lead to coalitions. But how does purging competent federal employees and replacing them with MAGA loyalists (or just not replacing them at all) create coalitions?
I’m neither deceptive nor a propagandist. Your data is simply wrong. There are more Democrats than Republicans among federal employees. That number has NOT been falling, although Trump is doing his best to decrease it.
There is no evidence that Democratic federal employees significantly undermine Republican administrations or that Republican federal employees significantly undermine Democratic administrations. This is deliberately divisive propaganda.
The fallacy that Trump attempts to propagate about the federal government being a mysterious “deep state” composed of leftists is a major MAGA GOP talking point and it is a LIE.
https://www.govexec.com/oversight/2015/08/there-are-more-republicans-federal-government-you-might-think/119138/
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/01/07/what-the-data-says-about-federal-workers/
Your links are not saying what you're claiming they're saying. First, the govexec poll data is from 2015 and is not scientific. The 2019 numbers i cited are from peer reviewed research. Second, the pew research doesn't even support your position.
But since you're willing to accept sources that aren't peer reviewed, check this out. 70% of political donations from the bureaucracy are to democrats. That is mostly in line with the trends identified elsewhere. https://www.fedsmith.com/2024/10/25/federal-employees-and-2024-political-donations/
The reality is the bureaucracy is a politically leftist institution with an agenda that most Americans do not agree with.
*were republicans
Spoken like a true paranoid Maga
No, spoken like someone who reads research papers.
Ann Applebaum, in a podcast explained how Poland overthrew its facist government recently. They did it by 2 different parties coming together to defeat the party in power.
Angry people (people who missed their friends, prom and graduation, who have not properly socialized at all yet) vote for angry people.
That’s why we need ranked choice voting
All vaccines, like all medications, can have serious side effects. But vaccines aren’t approved unless those side effects are rare.
Every medical recommendation is a risk/benefit assessment. We decide if the benefit of a certain procedure or treatment is greater than the risk of that procedure or treatment. Then we review that decision with the patient.
Of course, statistical risk is of little value if you’re the 1 person in 100,000 who has a serious side effect. After the fact, the risk was 100% for you. But unless obvious variables exist, doctors can’t predict individual reactions, particularly the rare ones.
I do not suffer from a one-sided or blind approach to vaccines or any other treatment. I invariably explain the risks versus benefits of treatments to my patients, not merely to limit my malpractice liability but because I believe the patient is the ultimate decision maker.
Perhaps my tedious habit of reviewing side effects beforehand explains my 45 years of medical practice without any malpractice lawsuits. Or perhaps there’s another explanation.
But I’m a firm believer in telling my patients the facts as well as my personal opinion based on my years of experience.
You are a strong proponent of the private sector. As a physician, I can assure you that the profit motive is not the most sound basis for a healthcare system. Deciding who gets care based on their ability to pay for it is inhumane and contrary to basic human principles.
However, I believe the private sector has an important role in healthcare. While they rarely provide the most universal service at the lowest possible price (the goal of most healthcare systems), they do provide innovation and speed of treatment at a very impressive level.
The COVID pandemic was a great example of public health agencies and the private sector working hand in hand. Our govt monitoring agencies provided the early warnings and immediate identification of cases. In fact, these watchdogs had been warning of an impending pandemic for years.
They assessed the efficacy of developing an acute treatment versus a vaccine based on the early data. Operation Warp Speed was the result of their recommendations to President Trump. The incredibly rapid development of safe and effective new vaccines is a tribute to our robust private sector companies.
Trump had a limited understanding of the medical science involved in controlling an epidemic but his initial response was appropriate.
Unfortunately, his political instincts warned him that he would be blamed for pandemic deaths if national hysteria took hold, so he began to downplay the pandemic, providing false hope in unproven remedies and reassuring the public that COVID was like the flu and that it would go away on its own.
This was a risky strategy, particularly as the deaths rose by hundreds of thousands. When Trump caught COVID, did he stay home? No. He wisely reported to the hospital immediately and received aggressive supportive treatment followed by a full series of COVID vaccine.
Yet he still feared the people would turn against him and blame him for the devastation of the pandemic. He began lashing out at advisors and medical professionals, including disparaging the same vaccines he had willingly received.
Trump even disparaged the use of masks and social distancing, techniques which are routinely employed in countries with high population density like Japan and China. These techniques aren’t perfect but they are helpful in most respiratory epidemics.
As COVID continued to mutate rapidly, it became transmissible by touch as well as capable of living for days on artificial surfaces, so the use of masks became ineffective.
The US began to fall behind other developed countries in pandemic control as the public, confused by the mixed messaging, became angry and polarized. Although we can’t rely upon the accuracy of data from Russia and China, the US ended up with the highest mortality rate of any developed country.
The CDC, NIH, and WHO did their part admirably in a situation not encountered in the past 100 years. The pharmaceutical industry rose to the challenge, creating innovative and effective vaccines and medication in record time.
The president was the only one out of step. He opposed rather than supported best evidence-based practices, creating a dangerous and lasting mistrust between the public and science in general. He refused the early lockdowns that would have cut the length of the pandemic. He unnecessarily spread anti-Asian rhetoric, claiming this was biological warfare from China.
Trump could have united the country in the face of this viral enemy but he chose to divide it even further. That was a grave error.
Of note: We still do not know where COVID arose. The revised reports that it came from the Wuhan lab were demanded by Trump when he was reelected despite the fact that no new evidence supported that theory. These are now political reports, not scientific reports.
It’s unlikely that we’ll ever isolate the exact origin, just as we haven’t identified the exact origin of HIV, Ebola, or Marburg. Natural mutation remains the most likely cause — nature is the largest laboratory of all. The number of mutations produced by researchers in one lab is dwarfed by the number constantly generated without controls in large animal populations.
Another point: The notion that masks are a useless infringement on personal freedom is a uniquely anti-scientific concept, one that was fanned by political propaganda. I can assure you that the next time you have surgery, the OR personnel will all be masked, gowned, gloved, and following proven antiseptic protocols.
A true leftist working class third party winning local and state elections - that’s where it’s at
Rank Choice voting would also benefit a third party.
Good idea.
It’s a bad idea. Firing longtime federal employees who have worked competently under past presidents from both parties is foolish at best.
Replacing them with inexperienced workers whose only loyalty is to Trump (rather than to either party or the Constitution) is a recipe for dictatorship.
Not replacing them at all will rapidly result in a weak, dysfunctional government.
No previous GOP president has felt the need to purge federal employees en masse.
It’s very obvious Trump wants to radically alter our government bureaucracy. Instead of a large, experienced network of people who enforce our laws and provide social services, he wants a small group of loyalists who will follow his orders blindly.
Trump wants to eliminate all obstacles to his policies and all taxes/regulation of the super wealthy. He wants his desires to supersede any laws.
That’s called a monarchy.
Have to disagree. While I find Trump distasteful, the "pearl clutching" of "the establishment" of cutting employees of the federal government is nothing more than an act of self protection
In 35+ years of working with large corporations, I find that there amount of taste is monumental
The US Federal government is the largest "corporation" and the number of positions of sinecure is quite mind boggling
Yeah, I am socially well "left of center", have only votes Democratic in all elections (or voted for Mickey Mouse) and find it hard to argue with the desired outcome of the Trumpian cohorts.
I guess that is the regulatory libertarian that balances the social liberal in me.
I agree that the process is distasteful
No sane person is in favor of govt waste.
We already have an extensive network of independent experts and agencies that monitor expenditures constantly, like the Inspectors General, NLRB, Govt Accountability Office, etc.
Unfortunately, Trump/Musk have fired most of the experienced staff at those agencies. Seems counterproductive, right?
Govt audits are by necessity slow because they require assessing agency performance in detail, identifying real problems, deciding where to cut or claw back, and implementing changes at a speed that allows the effects of cuts to be monitored.
DOGE’s manic wrecking ball approach is the furthest thing from that.
DOGE repeatedly overestimates the value of its cuts, makes enormous and repetitive errors in bookkeeping, is tremendously inefficient (like firing the entire staff of nuclear missile guardians and then scrambling to rehire them a week later), and despite much fanfare has only cut the govt budget by <0.9%.
DOGE’s “efficiency” is largely limited to eliminating agencies that regulate or have ongoing investigations into Trump/Musk businesses.
DOGE has also engendered countless lawsuits because many of its actions are illegal and/or unconstitutional. The lawyers that the govt will need to hire may end up costing more than DOGE saves.
Let’s call DOGE what it is — a scam designed to eliminate all financial obstacles to Trump/Musk and their buddy tech billionaires.
Eliminate DOGE and then we can have a serious conversation about bloat and waste in the federal budget.
Hey, I was an independent for many years because I felt both major parties cater to the needs of the wealthy.
I still believe that’s true but the wildly anti-democratic lurch to the right of the MAGA GOP is far more disturbing than DNC inertia.
If you think the Dems need young blood and fresher perspectives, I’m with you. I’m too old to run for office but what about you? How can you contribute?
New ideas don’t usually fall like manna from heaven. They’re hammered out by people committed to a better future. Become one of those people and create the future you want.
David Hogg’s insight is useful, especially pointing out the changing nature of cohorts of “young voters.” (I was once a member of the “youth vote” — 50 years ago😉)
But isn’t it ironic that we’re reading online about how screen time increases our isolation.
I welcome explanations of why so many people voted for Trump. Even more, I would love to hear some explanation of why he has gotten away with so many crimes. He should be in jail, along with all the insurrectionists he pardoned. I’d like to see Democrats taken to task for not holding him — and complicit Republicans—accountable.
When you have the richest men in the world putting out propaganda that they are right and everyone else is wrong, you get a felon who can be bought as President. Forget young people. They have persuaded millions of poor/moderate and well off Christians that think he was annointed by God to put white men back in charge.
Thank you. The reason they keep slamming their head against the wall & blaming Dems is because they don’t get it. They REFUSE to listen to what the real problem is…it is propaganda. Yes 30+ years of lies, smearing Dems, propaganda + they own ALL of the media now + Fox. It was a bad idea in 1996 & it’s still bad for our country today.
Absolutely!
As if the richest men in the world weren’t controlling the Biden admin.
It's the whataboutism by which our democracy dies.
He had wealthy donors as do all politicians, but didn't have them in an office in the White House and they didn't have power to order government employees to not do their jobs.
Oh government employees don’t need someone to tell them not to do their jobs.
What a ridiculous take.
You misspelled accurate. The shutdown of USAID causing a sudden defunding of progressive ESG NGOs is proof that they had no interest in helping people who actually needed help.
Ahahaha! Brilliant!
Sorry Charlie - as the tuna ad goes. There may have been some seriously wealthy people but their goal was not to shaft all of us and destroy our standing. Sheesh.
Well then…let’s just do nothing and let Musk take over. 🤦♀️
Absolutely correct. We need a good billionaire to create a media empire that tells the truth.
It would be an echo chamber. We need to get the truth to the other side. That is a challenge. One approach, since they like conspiracy theories, might be to frame the actual truth as a “conspiracy theory.” Then they might actually look at it.
The question is why do you think God wants white men to not be in charge of their own nations?
This is a wonderful question. My parents are evangelical Christians and they watch Christian TV all the time. Apparently there are some that say he T was chosen by y God. I can't imagine believing that. But, I'm not them....
Virginia, fairly clear at this point why people voted for Trump or why many tradition Democratic voters stayed on the sideline. The negative economy, rising crime, the increased illegal immigration. The Democratic Party focus on trans rights for children, DEI workplace rules and light on crime community policing instead of the aforementioned issues was tone deaf. Voters, particularly working class and people of color, knew this
But the economy is NOT negative. It’s booming.
Crime is NOT up. It is down
Illegal immigration is NOT increasing. It’s way down.
DEI does NOT affect many people directly. Neither does the trans issue.
It can’t just be the pronouns.
I know, I know, nobody likes the pronoun stuff, when they’re honest. But still…
Seems to me there is rampant disinformation floating about, promulgated by the Republican Party.
It’s all a big lie.
And, sadly, very effective.
Susanus, none of what you stated is accurate in the way that it impacted the electorate. Perhaps true the rates of inflation, violent crime, and amount of migrant crossings across the Mexico border decreased in 2024 compared to their recent peaks in 2022. But that is meaningless to families directly impacted by those issues. Total dollar food costs, gas & heating costs, dining out costs, violent felony crime, amount of illegal migrant crossings all increased, some significantly so, from 2020 when Biden/Harris took office compared to 2024. Food costs alone when up roughly 28-30% during that time. Talking about how inflation is now back to normal levels doesn't help the family that is now paying significantly higher costs. Offering platitudes that crime is at historically normal levels doesn't help the NYC subway commuter that felt the safety impact of felony violent crime increasing by 40% from 2020 to 2024
Harris had significant headwinds given the environment even though Biden did an overall great job as president. Offering macro stats to try to convince the electorate that what they see and feel every day isn't true is a strategy that rarely works. It didn't when HW Bush tried to use similar stats to convince the electorate that the economy was rising and better than they thought. It didn't work for Dinkins when trying to convince New Yorkers that the crime statistics were improving and NYers should feel safer now. They didn't and voted in a Republican mayor in an overwhelmingly Democratic city
STOP spewing propaganda....YOU are the one that's wrong. Nobody cares about your macro stat crap.
Don't be a simp...
This is why you had inflation
1. Orange allowed Covid to infect the U.S. & then stalled on testing so it could ravage Blue states/kill ppl so he could later blame Dem Govs
https://gregolear.substack.com/p/blue-state-genocide-is-acting-president
2. His inept "leadership" caused the stock market to be volatile
3. He lost 100,000s of jobs each month & 3 Million jobs in 4 years.
4. He pressured the FED to keep 0% rates, instead of raising it to offset inflation
5 He started a Trade War w/China & LOST costing us $64Billion
6. Suggesting we print money to pay down the Deficit, which would cause deflation & make the $dollar weaker
Doing those kinds of maneuvers doesn't show up right away...not until it gets down the road a bit & accumulates. Anyone who thinks the above type of hatchet jobs on the economy is immediate is MISINFORMED or doesn't understand how economies work.
Essentially none of what you stated was the direct cause of inflation during the Biden administration
What caused inflation was a lack of supply during Covid. Remember running out of toilet paper. That caused an increase in prices when demand is greater than supply. I paid $20 to Amazon for six small rolls of toilet paper and I was glad to get them. When covid ended there was massive demand for products but it took a long time to increase supply. Naturally inflation was up I believe almost 14%. Not Biden's fault not Trump's fault.
Biden got inflation down to 2% his last year thru deals made with manufacturers. He got no credit. These tariffs will raise inflation possibly double digits again. They'll blame Biden of course.
Yes it absolutely was, but what would a person who spews right wing propaganda even know about it? That is the whole ball of wax in a nutshell. For you to make that statement proves once again that your word salad you spewed is crap. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Look it up. Trump policies led to it, but yeah....you keep on blaming it on nebulous macro economics that you're using inappropriately in the first place. You're repeating talking points that you don't even understand, but go ahead....double down, pretend you're right & I'm wrong because after all...it's me saying it & not another white man. You're just another fascist enabler underneath it all.
Another contributor to the cost of living is climate change. I live in Southern California in a fire zone. The fires we just had are going to raise everyone's premiums, if they can get insurance at all. And healthcare! That's expensive because of the insurance companies (as well as technology). But no one seems to include those things in the cost of living figures. Whose fault are these things? Both parties.
Nope...that's reTHUGs. LOOK at the records & votes. Dem party ALWAYS did work on climate since Bill Clinton/Gore. Clinton did the Kyoto climate accords aimed at eliminating gases that cause global warming/climate change. Then Bush pulled us out. Obama got Paris accords 2015, Orange pulled us out. Biden did a big climate bill & now Orange Felon is trying to get rid of it. So no....NOT "both parties". Rethugs destroy, Dems fix, correct, look at the big picture. You need to look at congressional records which bare this out.
https://apnews.com/article/biden-signs-climate-health-bill-9a7f349fa7b07387d20ad603f2ff4875
I agree that Dems are better at this than Republicans, but there are plenty of Democrats who have supported the oil companies and fought solar. My own governor Newsom has destroyed rooftop solar in California. And of course there's Manchin, for another, even though he's not really a Democrat. This is why I say both parties.
Sadly, the real cost of things would've been the same, or more, under a Trump administration during those years.
I'd argue inflation and prices would have been considerably worse under Trump if he won in 2020 instead of Biden. His tariff policy during his first term reduced expected GDP by at least 0.2% and required a $23B bailout to corporate farmers. He likely would have doubled down on tariffs in 2020 so he wouldn't be seen as a loser like he is doing now by backtracking with Mexico & Canada
Most folks hear a slogan and repeat. The information is just a click away. The average worker has been trending water the last four years.
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000013?output_view=pct_12mths
Ugh! How do you get that ugly X thing off of it? Or does it have that because that's where you took it from?
Exactly. If all the news is right wing propaganda then most of the electorate are going to be very misinformed. Unless you are smart enough to put together information from a variety of sources your going to be misinformed.
Everything you said is a big lie, certainly.
“Right wing propaganda that you see with your own eyes on the ground instead of lying statisticians spewing BS on the approved news sources, that gets revised down two weeks later with no fanfare”
Harris actually spoke very little on the topics you mentioned, which seemed to actually lose her progressive voters. She spoke mainly about the economy, Women’s rights, healthcare, and taxes. Additionally, crime in the U.S. is not up at all, that is inaccurate according to studies tracking it over time. Lastly, our economy was actually doing much better if not well well by most metrics, despite public perception of it.
But the news is all propaganda now so people who don't know or care about finding out what's going on are brainwashed.
I agree, the Harris campaign didn't focus on these identity politics issues. Imo she did a good job on her campaign in an environment with v strong headwinds. My comment was more about the prioritization of the Biden/Harris administration (e.g., 1st day, Biden issues an EO allowing trans girls in school girl bathrooms. It took him 3 years to issue an EO about addressing the Mexico border illegal immigration problems)
You are arguing my point. Crime was absolutely up, as reflected in many statistics but more importantly, in the minds of the electorate. If you have to use stats to convince people they are actually safe when they feel they are not, you lost the election. Ditto the economy. Biden did an outstanding job in soft landing the economy. This also means there had to be a negative economy to soft land from! If you have to convince the electorate that macro stats show the economy is better than you feel in your everyday lives, you lost the election (e.g., HW Bush losing to Clinton). And who are most affected by homeless in parks, rising violent crime on subways, smash and grabs in Dollar Tree and Target? The working poor and people of color. Exactly the demographics that moved toward Trump in this election cycle
Clearly the perception of all these issues is heavily influenced by what people are told to be anxious about.
As you stated, if you’re constantly being told the economy is horrible and crime is up and stories are circulating about how awful everything is and how much crime illegal immigrants and unhoused people are engaged in, you probably will believe it. There is a tendency towards negative bias which humans are absolutely susceptible to. It can generally only be combatted with statistics, which I guess is unfortunately not very exciting. That’s something I think republicans are very good at — choosing negative, slightly nebulous things to blame on the liberal ideology, and then pushing that narrative for years while the democrats try to combat it with boring facts.
Truth aside (if there ever is a truth, because as you say, perception is certainly everything, and easily exploited). The biggest issue for democrats is mainly how to improve people’s perception of these same issues, and ensure that public perception is balanced, while their opponents attempt to continue convincing people that trans people are committing crimes against women, and that illegal aliens are not people who deserve rights, compassion, and an easier way to enter the country legally, but are instead active agents of chaos trying to destabilize the U.S. for example.
Just so people know. 0.6 % of people over 13 identify as transgender. Not really worth all this press, but anything about sex is a hot topic. I'm sure the number of men who beat there wives is higher, but not titilating.
You are arguing my point. Biden signed a transgender order literally his first day on the job. It showed the electorate where his priorities were, on identity politics. Not on food/gas prices, not on increased illegal immigration, not on rising crime
I agree with much of your comments and I understand your argument. But think you are an example of the disconnect from Democratic Party talking points and what people actually know, not what they are told to perceive
Cumulative food inflation in the US increased roughly 28-30% in 2024 compared to 2020. This means a grocery bill that was $100 when Biden/Harris started is $130 today. People aren't being told this by Fox News, this what they see/feel every week
2024 murder rate on NYC subways are currently at a 25 yr high. Felony violent crime on NYC subways increases roughly 40% from 2020 to 2024. People don't need stats to know that crime was an issue the past 4 years regardless of the macro stats you can cite
You are like the campaign person citing statistics that although the violent crime rate on NYC subways increased from one in two million to one in a million during this time, you still have only roughly a one in a million chance to be a victim so odds are still quite low you'll encounter violence and also crime is beginning to come down anyway so vote for Harris for more of the same
Ok, interesting. You really dug into some specifics here. I'd like to point out crime in cities and states can increase due to their policies while the overall crime in the country decreases. I don't think that's the root of what you're saying, though, and I don't want to go on a googling spree with you because I'm not sure it's really useful.
I think what I'm getting overall about your meaning is that you feel like, despite the "macro" statistics that Dems might use to combat people's anxieties and pain points, you feel that the establishment has a habit of talking down to people. You said "an establishment campaign person" would dismiss people's feelings of lack of safety or a bad economy by citing overall statistics.
I agree. The Democrats aren't great at simplifying their message and speaking to unify people. They love a moral high ground. They are very fact-y, and facts aren't fun, and they don't feel very empathetic or compelling. The current GOP is charismatic and great at utilizing fear to galvanize their base, which is why they've gained traction despite, you know, highly questionable morals (to say the very least).
So, the main goal of the Dems moving forward should be making people feel heard and seen while also being honest and transparent. Pushing back against propaganda but not dismissing concerns. We need strong voices who can cross party lines. We also have got to get money out of politics somehow, because it compromises all of our politicians, no matter their affiliation.
I live in Ky, so I think Beshear is a great example of a politician who might be that kind of voice. I also hope AOC is going to be a rallying point, because she really listens to her base and speaks to their issues clearly. Bernie has always been that voice, and he deserves support from the establishment.
Thanks for the conversation, by the way, it's been interesting.
Across the sample cities, the 2024 average homicide rate was about 6% lower than in 2019. Comparing the most recent six-month trends, the homicide rate during the first half of 2024 was 15% lower, on average, than during the same period in 2023, and 17% lower during the second half of the year.
AJ, you do know that Biden's administration started in 2021, not 2020. So your statistical comparison of 2020 to 2024 is inaccurate.
In 2024, food inflation in the United States was lower than in 2023, with food-at-home prices increasing by 1.2%. This was less than the 5% increase in 2023 and below the 20-year average of 2.7%.
So what are you saying? Crime is up even though it's not because people feel unsafe. I never heard Biden say one word trans girls ever. Where can I find that?
Yes, the pandemic caused companies to not produce products. Remember no toilet paper? When the supply of products is low, prices go up. Eventually we can't pay those prices and stop buying. When demand for products goes down prices go down. Prices will NEVER back to pre Covid levels ever. Jesus Christ could become President and still wouldn't lower prices to level. Face it.
Yeah, she said she was going to keep doing the same thing, just MOARRRR!
I mean, not to mention the dodgy overlap of capitalism and journalism
Actually crime has gone way down in the last 10 years, and inflation is now at a normal 2%. Prices are not going back to pre pandemic levels unless we a terrible depression like the 1930s and it looks like Trump might make that happen. Again, news is now propaganda owned by the Uber wealthy.
I think it's worth noting that just saying "the economy is overall better" is not the same thing as saying that people's lives are overall better. They may be on a macro scale (as you noted AJ), but the ultimate issue is that people are struggling even in a healthy economy because they aren't being cared for.
That misery is easily exploited by those who want to blame that suffering on a liberal ideology or Biden overly focusing on trans rights or whatever when, in fact, crucial root issues like unfair taxes, horrible healthcare, negligible gun laws (see reported high crime rates), and an incredibly low minimum wage are mainly to blame. Unfortunately, Republicans don't seem to want to allow legislation in these areas to be passed.
Well there is really going to be inflation when there are tariffs on Canadia and Mexico. Talk about food prices going up. How anyone thought Trump would be better amazes me. Trump even said he couldn't lower prices.
He said it just after he secured the election.
Rlitt, I notice your use of statistics is quite suspect. As per FBI data, US violent crime was lower in 2014 compared to 2023 (2024 numbers haven't been issued yet). 364 incidents per 100,000 people in 2014 compared to 373 per 100,000 in 2023 (and this was after violent crime numbers peaked in 2021 & 2022). Your statement that US crime has as gone way down in the last 10 years is completely false
Crime has been consistently going down since the 1980s, but the decrease over the past five or six years is due entirely to corrupt DAs not enforcing the law, and statisticians counting crime based on convictions and not victim complaints.
Amazing how crime goes down when cities stop reporting crime stats to the FBI. We’re the Soviet Union now.
The republicans focused on that in the homestretch if the election. Yes, Dems overemphasize their openness to all, it’s that openness that trump and his campaign twisted into woke, trans bathrooms,etc. Dems never demanded bathrooms for transgender people. Republicans created that and propagandized it, it worked. Flooding the zone. I have four gen z daughters, they know exactly what they want. A fair wage, affordable housing and some kind of safety net that includes good health care. In my opinion, capitalism and the greed that comes with it are not a priority for this generation, personal freedom and being told the truth is what they want. We need term limits
Yes this! I told others throughout the election and afterwards. Harris focused on the economy, tax breaks for the middle/working class and small businesses, healthcare, and women’s rights. However, the right overwhelmed viewers with propaganda ads on trans issues and immigration. Unless the general public tuned-in to her rallies and interviews or read over her in-depth policy on her website they had a completely different idea of what her focus and plan was for while she was in office. So many people cut off their nose to spite their face by not doing their due diligence in properly researching the candidates and issues.
Agree with your comments Michelle, Haley. Think the focus on identity politics is from lazy strategy and driven by a vocal minority within the party. Although I think it is misleading to day to say identity politics like trans rights weren't a focus by the administration. Example: Biden 1st day in office issues an EO allowing trans girls in school girl bathrooms. It took him three years to issue orders to address the Mexico border issue (which likely drove the drop in migrant crossings in 2024).
If the DNC can focus on the economy (middle class specifically, not the poor), reducing crime, encouraging legal immigration while being strong against illegal immigration, then they can reverse the trends of poc, GenZ, and working poor voting GOP
Isn't there a disconnect between these two thoughts: "middle class specifically, not the poor" and "
There is a large difference between the middle class which is roughly $50k to 150k per year and the working poor which can be minimum wage and 20-50k per year for a household. Policies that supports one demographic usually does not support the other e.g., dramatic increases in minimum wages
No. Republicans did NOT create that. Obama’s DOJ did in May of 2016.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/us-departments-justice-and-education-release-joint-guidance-help-schools-ensure-civil-rights
then they can reverse the trends of working poor voting GOP
many of these points are lies. Crime is down for example.
? Crime was not down during Biden's term. What data are you referring to?
In NYC for instance, murder rate on subways are at a 25yr high. Felony violent crime has increased roughly 40% when comparing 2020 to 2024
You got duped, along with millions of others.
Don’t kid yourself that you cared about any of the important issues. If you (or anyone who voted for Trump) cared, you would have informed yourself, and it would have been obvious that Trump wasn’t going to help you with any of your concerns. Quite the opposite.
The truth is that most Americans are doing just fine. They’re doing so well that they’re bored, and aimless. And this makes them susceptible to charlatans selling them exciting stories.
So someone convinced you that “the Democratic Party focus on trans rights” was a really big deal. And they played millions of others by zoning in on their emotional weak spots.
Voting for Trump was an irresponsible decision. I hope you get a chance to do better next time.
? Pretty clear by the post-election polling that the majority of the electorate definitely did not feel they did fine the past few years even if they voted Harris
And yet:
1. There is no evidence to support their claims. Individuals can struggle, because that’s true of any time. But in general, Americans were much better off under Biden, even when comparing to pre-COVID.
2. Like I said above, those Americans claiming to be worse off DID NOT BOTHER to contemplate what Trump was offering. For example, he was promising inflation, so if your claim was that you didn’t like inflation, voting for him was an extremely strange choice.
So what happened?
All of the rational reasons are reverse engineered garbage. The decision to vote for Trump came first, based on psychological reasons. The rational explanations came second, because they’re just excuses.
The truth: too many Americans are pampered, adult-aged children. Their lives have always been easy, and they assume it will always be that way. So they don’t know or care how their country works, and they think it’s OK to vote for a charlatan like Trump just because he sells them the right line.
Disagree, it is clear that many families were worst off the past 4 years under certain type of metrics in terms of buying power, inflation, crime. Factually undeniable at this point. What you and I would argue is that the inflationary economic issues had little to do with Biden and the Dems, things (crime, immigration, economy) were clearly improving because of Biden, and Trump is a non-starter as a lying felon and autocratic disruptor of the American democracy.
However the majority of the electorate only care about issues that only affect their home and pocketbook. It's easy to worry about foreign aid and climate change when you can afford to shop at Target every week, many Americans can't. 2024 is increasingly looking like a pretty normal anti-incumbent election to me similar to Carter to Reagan, HW Bush to Clinton, Dinkins to Giuliani in NYC, etc. The electorate rebelled against the incumbent party of economic recession, higher inflation, higher crime. Happens all the time
I'd agree the majority of the American electorate are uninformed. But if the Dems want to be seen as a viable alternative to Maga, it has to get out of the FALSE narrative that Trump voters were stupid enough to be swayed by right wing propaganda, are racist, are sexist. That isn't the majority of Trump voters and it's not how he won
I'll try to do this in a sensible order.
Some of what you say is flat out wrong. Economic growth was almost unbelievably strong under Biden. So anyone who thinks there was 'economic recession' is wrong. They must also have poor judgement on information sources (someone is lying to them and they didn't notice), and little interest in the topic, because it's easily verifiable.
Some things are contested in terms of facts, or mixed. Crime is down generally but the mix of crime is more complicated. Inflation is low but there was a period of inflation.
But even if you let voters off the hook, and say that they're just expressing their personal circumstances, it still doesn't explain the vote for Trump. On any of the issues you claim to be important, Trump was offering people something worse. Inflation is the easiest one. Trump was PROMISING inflation, and lots of it. So if inflation is bad, then it was indeed a stupid decision to vote for Trump.
But let's get to your silliest claim, because this is where the real point is: this was in no way a normal election. Instead, this was an election where one candidate was PROMISING to dismantle all of the things that have made the USA strong, prosperous and free, and a majority of people voted for it.
You don't want to see it, because once you accept this reality, then you realise that the whole concept of the USA is crumbling. But you had better face up to it. Look at the last few weeks and tell me if Trump has done anything that is designed to be in the interests of US citizens. He is appointing preposterous candidates to important posts, and stripping the government of expertise and checks and balances. It's a full blown crisis, and it's EXACTLY WHAT HE PROMISED.
So why did people cast such a self-destructive vote? It's because (a) they incorrectly thought it didn't matter, and (b) they were duped into thinking that culture war issues were exciting and relevant.
It was outrageously irresponsible. It was the behaviour of children.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-156489812?source=queue
Why are you spewing right wing talking points & lies. Dems did not stay on the sideline. The economy is/was roaring, crime was going down, & immigration was down. JFC turn off Fox news...they don't focus on trans, they defend it when it's being attacked. DEI was dragged back from the 60's by Republicans....you're the one whose tone deaf. Oh Dems are light on crime...OMFG really?? Uhhh which party put the criminal rapist in the WH? Was the criminal surrounded by other Billionaire creeps that were also Republicans? WHO is letting 1500 criminals out of prison? The same one that let 5000 Taliban prisoners out that did 9-11 & then tried to blame others.
You need to be deprogrammed because everything you wrote is propaganda....
This comment is a good example of why Harris lost. The disconnect between realities families were feeling vs the bubble talking points that the economy, crime and immigration weren't problems and anyone who thought they were getting influenced by Fox News. There's a reason why people of color, working class, and younger GenZ to Trump in historical numbers. Crime, high living costs, high transportation costs affects these groups the most. You can tell these groups all you want that crime & inflation is down but they will believe it only if they see it in their own households
Facts are facts. Crime, inflation, net illegal immigration were all higher during Biden/Harris term. This is indisputable. Anyone who says other is engaged in mis or disinformation. And post-election polling is v clear now these were the primary issues for the majority of the electorate. Biden wasn't the cause of the inflation and did a great job of having the economy make a soft landing. Crime and illegal immigration were way down in 2024 compared to near record peaks in 2021/2022 after the Biden administration started making it a focus in 2023. The electorate probably discounted the actions as too late window dressing for the upcoming election and not as defining issues for the Harris Administration
Uh you LITERALLY spewed right win talking points, ok. What you don't "get" is that Harris didn't "lose". You're still too busy trying to be impressive & yammering on & on about nonsense that has literally nothing to do with voters or who won. There is a growing consensus of election IT experts that have found some evidence of nonhuman manipulation with regard to the vote totals. There is also a very large amount of absentee ballots that were never tabulated...millions of them. So, go ahead & scream "conspiracy theorist", but if you ever looked at the evidence of 2000 & 2004 the evidence is like an OJ Simpson amount that proves republicans stole both of those elections & if you think Orange didn't steal the 2016 election along with Putin ...I have a bridge to sell you. Putin continues to go around the globe putting his dirty paws on the scale of democracy. They blamed the Brits & attacked them harshly until it came out...."oh wait...Putin hacked it". That is what you are doing right now. It's what MSM always does, & it's what establishment Dems continue to do, but there is a large group that is growing bigger everyday that's going to have a talk with the "pretending" reTHUGs didn't steal elections & attacking people that find this out & have it evaluated.
Harris ran a near perfect campaign. If you have a functioning brain....then you have to REMEMBER that Orange lost 20% of the GOP base that he couldn't afford to lose & those voters did not come back...contrary to belief. Then it was revealed how reTHUGs/Trump rigged the polls by adding 60 or 80 right wing polls into the average. He paid someone to do the same in 2016. Who rigs polls?? Why?? Well, you would ONLY rig polls if you intended to cheat & steal an election so you can fool the public into thinking it is "neck n neck"...they even tried to claim it was a "tie". Nope. It was never a tie. Msnbc knew it, but still used those polls like they were 100%. That's maybe like ...journalistic malpractice because Ari Melber droned on about that day after day, just like the right wing fake age crap & then the carefully crafted lie about Biden having dementia AFTER he proved to the NYT with a doctor's report that he did not have Dementia.
Hey I get it...this stuff makes you uncomfortable...it's WAY easier to believe I'm a hack or a loon, then to track down this info. There are election experts who've tied this all together on Spoonamore's page & he has some of the stats where they audited parts of the election. A LOT of people do not want to know this. The Dem party won't face up to it, but we've decided that we're going to MAKE THEM face it, because people are angry after working their asses off for the party only to be abandoned by them while we begged them to audit the swing states.
You can ignore all that stuff if you want, but if you want to call me a few more names we can get into a flame war too....your move. My point is that YOU think that you can glean some info to help win by using manipulated data, &/or blaming Dems or Harris, but it ain't so....it just ain't so. I see the white males jumping in the party with glee just like last time....thinking they can "fix" what isn't broken. It's a huge mistake, but that'll be on you guys later & we'll come at you with a vengeance about how YOU fked it all up next time, ok? We'll see how you all deal with it.
Now if you INSIST on blaming Dems or a Dem, I've got one for you. Obama. Obama put this thing in motion. Yes they are falling all over themselves to protect him to the point that the media Politico intentionally edited a video of Pelosi saying she wouldn't ask Biden to step down so it looks like she asked him to step down, & NYT, who have the proof Biden didn't have Dementia via his Dr.'s report continued to claim the opposite. As for Clooney....well you know he was Obama's fig leaf to say what he wanted to say. Obama interfered with our election by trying to throw Dem primary voters out & do a blitz primary suggested by dopey Ezra Klein. Joy tried to explain how "they" donors were trying to hamstring the ticket & choose a completely different one. If you're fine with that, then you didn't vote in the primary for Biden & that makes you biased & wanted something else even though you're not a Dem so then you shouldn't be weighing in at all if that's the case. Psaki, the Obama minion tried to shut her up. That is the braintrust at Msnbc. They lost over half their audience over that election. The Clintons endorsed right away, but the Obamas took days. Why? Because HE wanted someone else. Now ask yourself.....what if Obama had just stayed the HELL out of it??? Then Biden would've gone forward. They still would've tried to cheat, but Biden would've been tipped off by his many friends here & abroad. I know he'd have had an audit if we begged....because Biden always listened to his people. He got stuff for the progs they wanted & helped them, & he got things that everyone wants & needs.
Well you can give it some thought...you don't need to reply. There's a lot of things going on, but I watched this election minute by minute in great detail. It's as big a waste of time to base the 2024 election on anything, just as it was a fool's errand for 2016. We have no press corps.
Merrick Garland was as feckkess as they come, but certainly we can't blame it all on him. There's lots of blame to go around.
young gen z who support Trump are siloed in a media environment that doesn’t question this new world view.
Let’s assume your observation is correct. Now, how do we change that?
I have no idea. It’s a problem. Ask a middle or high school teacher if they think the Tate brothers have influenced their male students. All my teacher friends have watched the influence grow for many years. My snarky comment is real men, with morals and compassion who have empathy and strength need to step up.
I think we have to bombard those silos with an alternative, more humanistic point of view.
Those silos are largely composed of right wing social media platforms, violent video games, corrupt influencers, and pseudo-patriotic podcasts. All of those vehicles can be used for positive rather than negative messaging.
“David Hogg” and “insight” are two words that don’t belong in the same sentence.
I am a Baby Boomer and a retired engineer whose career was based primarily on working as a consultant to municipalities in three states. The one commonality was that all expected the federal government to step in in a large manner to finance the majority of their projects. Few were willing to raise local taxes or rates to pay for the required work. I believe we voters have created an entitled attitude to our lives such that we want the federal government to take care of our "lives" so we do not have to take responsibility for it. I believe we the people need to accept the fact that we are responsible for our words, actions and in-actions and that to do so we need to reduce the federal government programs, raise the federal revenue so that we pay for what serves us today and do not push that debt on to future generations, we need to hold all government contracts accountable to meet their obligations, we need to hold the politicians to the US Constitution and laws and to set term limits for all elected and appointed officials (judges, Representatives, Senators, Gov'nrs etc). We also need to teach citizenship in schools, including the concept of "thou shall not" . Trump and Vance are two of many that do not accept their own responsibility and their election falls on the shoulders of Mitch McConnell alone for putting Party above Country... and in part, the Democratic Party's unwillingness to play hardball.
One caveat lots of local governments wouldn’t have the resources for the big projects even if they raised taxes. And many states would have the same issue. Note the imbalance of payments among states. But the federal government does have the obligation to pay for things that state and local governments can’t do — the COVID vaccine development and distribution, our national highway and bridge systems. And frankly there are issues that may pertain to one location today but to the whole country in time (how to address climate change and vast changes to our water and air and infrastructure). Now I know there are things that states could do but won’t raise their taxes but be aware that there are employees writing grants and seeking programs to fund the needs they see everyday. Those folks are being stonewalled by their legislators but trying to serve their communities —lots of public health departments. You don’t mention which states or whether their legislatures are controlled by democrats or republicans but think about that and let us know who’s in control of the purse strings. It’s the same at the federal level. Average working folks and most middle class folks pay at a higher effective tax rate than the billionaires (I’m a retired tax CPA). And it’s clear that dems did a lot more to balance the budget if not pay down the debt than W did by giving tax cuts while waging war on credit. The 🍊💩 also gave a huge cut to billionaires and millionaires without touching the budget. Frankly look at who won’t pay taxes in this administration. We need to spread the tax burden equitably rather than blaming average folks and civil servants for being entitled. That’s like telling me I’m entitled because I collect my social security (and pay taxes on it and pay more for Medicare). There are lots of us out here who are willing to pay our fair share but not to let the rich slide. We were better off when the top rate was 90%
Yes!!
While MAGA followers rail against the so-called “tyranny” of the federal govt, a majority of them rely on federal funding, both at the state and individual level.
Most Americans don’t realize how lucky they are to live in the wealthiest country in the world. They feel entitled to govt services without any corresponding responsibility for providing, controlling, or limiting them.
Trump’s plan to dismantle the bureaucracy necessary to provide those services is poorly understood by his followers.
They are in for a rude awakening.
I just read an article that said Musk will be the first trillionaire and Bezos and Zuck are far behind. I also just read that several Congressmen put together several plans for helping Americans, and Musk, not Trump, told them to forget about spending money on helpful programs because they are not going to get the money. We are playing a whole new new ball game.
And just think, no one elected Musk.
David Hogg has the passion and the intelligence to become a national leader. I’m 90 years old and the only political organization I contribute to any more is David’s “Leaders We Deserve.” I hope he wins the DNC position because he will bring fresh air to the democratic party.
My two cents.
Elected Dems should be mounting our own occupation of government, our own January 6.
Elected Dems should be marching to the doors of illegally closed federal offices, unarmed. That's where it might make sense to read a letter similar to this one.
Elected Dems should put themselves in a position to be arrested in jail for challenging the illegal activities of the Trump regime. Think Alexi Navalny.
Elected Dems should be willing to sacrifice their freedom to draw this line in the sand. They need to lead. Then we'll follow
Average citizens being arrested won't make much difference. I've been there and done that in Raleigh. Elected officials are the ones who must challenge Trump's illegal coup.
Unless and until elected officials are willing to be incarcerated, it's all just noise. Strongly worded letters don't mean jack shit unless they're backed up by civil disobedience.
If we actually had more than a handful of sitting Democrats with the slightest shred of fortitude, I’d agree with you.
The party leadership, however, is still sitting firmly on “when they go low, we just get high,” and precluding any of that. Probably because Schumer can’t bring a flask with him.
This is a great piece of real and strategic information. Ok a a boomer with kids and nieces and nephews in the older group and even a bit older I have to admit that I don’t have much contact with the newest cohort of voters. And we definitely need a way in to their thinking and voting positions before they get too settled. While I’m sure most of them would not find the exposed real 🍊💩 to their liking, getting the message to them is critical and requires insight and expertise. It’s doubtful that any of the other candidates has a clue so I sincerely hope David gets elected. Any info on how to contact folks (if it’s even still possible) would be much appreciated. Also if someone else is selected, contact info to loudly recommend a special position for David and others with his expertise.
Ben this is more of what you need to do. And David tell us how we can help you capture the hearts and minds of our newest voters for justice and democracy
The solution to the problem cannot be a distributed cultural movement to abandon phones — it must be for Democrats to stop moralizing and fighting a politics of propriety over niche issues that most Americans, even those marginalized groups that Democrats claim to speak for, do not agree with them on.
And the chances of them doing that are nil because moralizing is their entire brand now.
That's a ridiculous thing to say. Dems passed infrastructure bills during the Biden Administration.
Hire Faiz Shakir. Then listen to Bernie and focus on pay, health, climate, college and guns. Let the young people know you care about what actually affects them for god’s sake. ♥️
Dear Lola, Thank you for your thoughtful response. I am aware of Bernie’s mixed status on gun control. As an advocate for a more restrictive position on guns myself, I agree that Bernie has sometimes supported gun legislation and sometimes supported the gun lobby. He began as a mayor in Vermont which is a rural state that has an old fashioned idea about guns. When I was young, many years ago, guns were thought of as a means for hunting for food not people and for protection against wild animals not one’s neighbor or the government or our children . That is still how many rural states feel. Anyway, Bernie has proven over and over again that he stands for working people and healthcare for all and a fair living wage and college education that folks can afford. I believe him to be a sincere advocate for the people instead of corporations. So I will continue to be a supporter of Bernie.I also think young folks are bright and often informed about issues that are close to their hearts. I think they are aware that Bernie’s position on guns has been mixed and that he has evolved as has the democratic party and the public at large. I respect your opinion and wish you the very best.♥️
Dems don’t listen very well do they?♥️
That’s where you get into trouble….listening to what people say, instead of what they do. You don’t know Bernie’s real record & if you did you’d stop acting like he’s someone to look up to. I have some inconvenient news for you….young people have a LOT to learn before they can lead others, so this is the time they should be listening, learning etc…not trying to lead people without the benefit of experience.
Bernie owes his entire career to the NRA. He voted right along with them against the Brady Bill 4 times, & against the provision that allowed families of dead kids to sue the manufacturer. Now….tell me how we should listen to Bernie…on guns, ok. He’s also wrong on Medicare for all. Some people are going to learn how much better Medicaid is than Medicare. He still has people repeating his lies that UHC = single payer, but it’s not true.
How could I ever trust a leader GenZ or not, who continues to believe all these false platitudes that Bernie has spread with the help of rich republicans? I can’t. They need to be smarter than that.
I wish this younger generation would break off and form a progressive party. As a GenXer who raised an older Zer I really want to stop voting for establishment Democrats and start voting for these younger progressives that actually understand the world we live in now. And I realize a third party seems reckless- but if it has to get even worse before these old people (including people my age) retire and get out of the way, then so be it because what they are doing isn’t working- at all. They care about themselves alone and don’t care about the people they say they represent and serve at all.
The problem with that is it would split the left & we’d be stuck with MAGA. The progressives need to work with their not so progressive colleagues & young people need to run for office.
By very early in Biden's term, say March, '21, it was known, that those 18 and under were safe, for the most part, from Covid. Less than 1,000 had died by either the end of '22 or '23. Schools not only could have been reopened, they should have been. The main people who died, were over 55, obese, diabetic, and had heart disease, of one sort or another. They made up 83-84% of the dead,
Society could have come back sooner and we would be a better nation for it.
But nobody really were sure of that at the time. So if you sent them back to school and 3,000 kids died, they would have screamed about that.
Sweden had proved it by the start of 2021. They never had masks, isolation, closed schools, and they had the same results, based on age, as anyone else in Europe or North America. They were in fact, a control group, and the control group proved, that unless one was over 55, obese, diabetic, with heart disease, the chances of dying were very, very, slim. Check out their data, am sure it is available somewhere on the internet.
Yes, but Sweden is different. They had a different tactics. The focused on slowing not stopping the pandemic. They did let kids up to 16 in school but no one older. But they weren't sure that's kids sick. It's easy to say after the fact. And we had 50 seperate covid plans.
They were very much the odd country out, without any followers, that remember. Yet, they fared no worse, for death and sickness, but much better for their children, in terms of learning, society, in terms of stability, and happiness in terms of outcome.
This is a popular but false myth about Sweden during Covid. Their response eventually aligned to rest of Europe. Sweden did try and resist masking and distancing in the early days. They saw a spike in cases relative to their neighbors which had stricter distancing & mask rules. By 2021, Sweden had mask, social distancing, and lockdown rules in effect. Sweden is actually a study on how masks and social distancing effectively addressed Covid
Sweden has always fared better than the US in healthcare outcomes, including overall happiness. This isn’t a phenomenon related uniquely to the COVID pandemic. It’s the result of less poverty, a strong national healthcare system, and an extensive network of social services.
I think their population is healthier.
This “tactic” was the correct response, and the one that even US Pandemic Plans called for decades prior. They were right. Democrats have to be able to actually acknowledge that at some point. Without a “but”
Sweden’s initial approach to the pandemic — no mandates, limited recommendations on masking, no school closings — was reversed once it became apparent that they had a higher death rate than any other Scandinavian country.
READ THIS ⬇️
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55371102
Sweden is a racially and ethnically homogeneous country with a strong national healthcare system, little poverty, and a reliable social service network.
As a result, Sweden’s healthcare outcomes are significantly better than the US across the board.
Sweden could NOT be a control group for the US due to our wide, pre-existing differences.
It is true that we have much more variation in our population, but that works equally well for those who are more susceptible to dying as well as being more able to not even know the disease is in one’s own body. Over the course of all the variations, those should, more or less, cancel each other out.
So, it’s OK for teachers and school administrators to die? Or the kids’ vulnerable grandparents? That’s what we were talking about back then, once we learned—over time—that kids were less likely to experience bad outcomes. Kids don’t live or learn alone!!!! Teachers decided they didn’t want to die, all by themselves. Plus, we don’t know whether kids who were infected will experience negative effects when they’re older, including kids in Sweden.
This was a new, unknown virus that trmp said would go away on its own. But “conservatives” created a ruckus at school board meetings—egged on by radical right-wing infiltrators with their kids in private schools or grown up.
I witnessed this and testify to it, but the media has already suppressed and rewritten the truth. And the madman who let Covid spread because he thought it would primarily KILL people in blue cities—is this something YOU agree with??—was elevated by the media and got away with murder. But “Biden was old,” and THE MEDIA installed the Insurrectionist Criminal to kill and injure innocent people again
This WAS known. The rest of the world knew it in the summer of 2020. Many US Democrats (AND medical organizations) were all publicly advocating for full school re-opening until Trump said so too, then everyone reversed course.
You are mistaken. Please take a look at countries in S.E. Asia, especially Singapore and Malaysia.
But all those students had teachers and parents who were in the more vulnerable age range. There was a long stretch where everyone I knew who was getting COVID was getting it from their kids.
Schools could have reopened sooner if people had been willing to embrace masking, testing, and ventilation. But bizarrely, there was too much opposition to the very measures that would’ve rendered in-person schools safer.
Through 2023, only about 1,000, on the lower side of it, died of Covid. The danger for the schools involved those over 55 who were obese, were diabetics, and had heart disease. That group encompassed 84% of the death toll. Children spread Covid, to some degree, but if one did not have all four of those conditions one was almost completely safe. There will always be some people, who because of their DNA are more susceptible to dying from any vaccine, the question remains, does one mess up an entire generation for a problem that did not exist for them. Everyone did not need to take extra care.
Do you know how many people get sick because their children brought something home from school?
The so-called common cold is really a collection of either 30 something or 50 something viruses, which is why by the time we get into our 60’s, we stop getting colds, because we’ve had them all.
Having lived a life with a very poor working immune system am very aware of this, and while most do get sick, that is about it, it lasts a week, or less, and then they get healthy.
There’s no way scientists can predict the direction of a pandemic due to a new, highly contagious, potentially fatal virus that mutates continuously.
Public health measures to contain such an outbreak generally lean towards being more cautious rather than taking any risks. Why? Because every human life is precious.
Businesses can be rebuilt and educational losses can be made up. But dead people cannot be brought back to life.
The fact that only 17% of the dead were young and healthy means that over 200,000 young, healthy people died from COVID.
Add to that the fact that young, healthy people were more likely to experience non-debilitating illness and thus more likely to spread the disease to the one million older, less healthy people who died.
It’s easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. But decisions made at the peak of an epidemic reflect only the data available at that point in time.
We have known for 2,500 or so, that in most cases, when one has a severe infection/disease, if they recover, they rarely ever have it again. The body has built up antibodies for it, that tend to stay within the body, just for those occasions. The better plan, would have been to focus protection on those over 55, with the three main disabilities. That is a much smaller group, and more amenable to being persuaded, of what is needed to stay healthy.
Rounding up the children from school could have simply been avoided by giving those 55 or older who worked in it, a temporary benefit, so they that they did not have to work.
Hindsight, 20 20.
Does the *quality* of a human life not matter too?!
These are incredibly difficult questions and judgements, for sure, but the decisions that were made traded significant negative impact on quality of life - both in the moment and rippling down throughout the life span - for quantity of life. "Making up" is not remotely a simple task.
Public health is too narrow a lens to be making these sorts of difficult policy choices in isolation. This is why all previous pandemic planning exercises (completed in less emotional/emergent conditions) advocated responses like Sweden's.
But what about kids that live with grandma or disabled parents?
Exactly.
Grandma or even Grandpa could be a problem, but might not be. Merely being over 55 was not in and of itself a major problem, it was part of a quartet of problems, which when joined together, produced a very bad reaction, that resulted in death for some, but apparently not all that had this quartet.
Spent some time in my childhood in convalescent hospitals, so was aware of what impairment could bring. Disabled people often need help, but are as much as they can be, for the most part, in my experience, fiercely independent. The child would be a problem in any event and the relationship would be different than a healthy parent-healthy child relationship. It would largely depend on the disability.
And it was Democrat politicians and voters who were more likely to shame and threaten the young people who called out these restrictions. Heck, some Democrat governers even encouraged people to report lockdown violations to a talltle tale hotline. So while Trump did push for COVID policies they hated, Democrats were more likely to commit overreach on the local level.
“it was known, that those 18 and under were safe, for the most part, from Covid.”
This is simply not true.
As an older American, I spit on any Gen Z -sshole who voted for the fascist because they didn't have their "prom or their graduation" during a pandemic. Here's my message to all such selfish, stupid -sswipes - GFY.
FWIW the single biggest generational demo for Trump this last go-round was Gen X.
Yeah, so? Every generation has had their lives interrupted in some way - WWI, Depression, WWII, social upheaval, Vietnam, high inflation and interest rates, etc. They're upset about disruption caused by COVID? Boo hoo. People in the past didn't vote in a fucking fascist.
Sure they did.
None of this is new. People voted in McCarthy — the guy who frequented the Nazi GAB rallies before the war and borrowed their rhetoric and slogans. They voted for Reagan, who outsourced the fascism to the free market. They kept voting in Strom Thurmond. They’ve voted for McConnell and Tuberville and Jordan.
It’s short-sighted to believe that MAGA just suddenly appeared with Trump. That malignancy’s been around a while now. Arguably since Reconstruction. They just kept rebranding and knowing when to keep things quiet — until they were able to get more power.
Problem ain’t Trump. He’s the mouthpiece. He’s the second coming of Reagan – the cowboy actor who does what his bosses tell him to do.
Problem’s that the GOP’s had that very cancer for a good, long time, and kept insisting the same thing “no, you, the Democrats, are the real problem, the real fascists, the real Nazis.”
Every accusation, a brand-fucking-new confession — but…I’m overplaying the “new” a bit. That horse was dead back in 1954, but didn’t stop them from beating it.
I'm old. You're wrong.
Compelling argument.
More compelling than your incoherent mess.
We really need to get rid of Citizens United and the two-party limitation. Get rid of the insane money and no more Pasty Boy politics. Open the forum to independent parties and the choices become more diverse, candidates will have to make real plans and have no option except to follow through with their promises. I for one would be delighted to stop getting spam to ask for money two dozen times a day.
It really is that. Money out of politics. Our founders were right — parties ruin everything, especially when we only have two.
But we’ll need the GOP on board for that. Because every sitting member of the government — has benefitted from CU, the lack of term limits, and, I mean frankly, Wonderbread HOA politics.
There’s probably a handful that, even as it sits, would be on board. But most of them — I mean, really. I can’t imagine Liz Warren, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, or Ken Martin even speaking those words aloud, let alone voting for it.
That is enlightening. But they have effectively voted in a dictator. The sitting president only cared for their votes. Now, he’s going to systematically destroy our democracy. I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who voted for him and couldn’t see how dangerous he would be.
U mean Joe Biden?
No. I mean the current sitting president.
As a high school English teacher, now recently retired, I used our non-fiction unit to expose students to the growing research on the cognitive, physical, and social harm an over-reliance on phones and social media. Many grumbled at first, but when given the opportunity at the end of the semester to rank the most valuable lessons, this one was always at or near the top. Particularly effective was their learning that Silicon Valley honchos did not allow their children access to smart phones and social media, putting their kids in expensive schools where phones were forbidden. What they took away was that they were being used in a way rich kids were being protected. It made them angry, and helped them understand how they were being manipulated by Facebook, Google, etc. purely for financial gain. Any teachers out there? Consider incorporating such learnings in your curriculum. We and your kids will be better off.
Brava!!
Pretty sure the new gen z voters didn’t have a full understanding the harm of being a one issue voter and that issue being Gaza