You guys are Democrats...

alohafri wrote:Why is it so difficult for the "new" Democratic party to listen to guys like James Carville, who have been around the block a few times? Are neither party interested in expanding the tent to garner more votes? The Republicans are happy kowtowing to the gun-toting fake Christians at the expense of moderates and the Democrats are happy kowtowing to the woke crowd, also at the expense of the moderates. Bill Maher had an excellent rant on this the other night. It's well worth a search.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:Why is it so difficult for the "new" Democratic party to listen to guys like James Carville, who have been around the block a few times? Are neither party interested in expanding the tent to garner more votes? The Republicans are happy kowtowing to the gun-toting fake Christians at the expense of moderates and the Democrats are happy kowtowing to the woke crowd, also at the expense of the moderates. Bill Maher had an excellent rant on this the other night. It's well worth a search.

I'm interested in knowing what it is you think Dems are doing to show moderates they don't want them in their tent?  I'm not saying you're wrong.  You might be 100% right.  I just don't really know what you think is the signal they're sending that's pushing them out.  I hear talk about the woke crowd, but I don't objectively know what that even is or even means.  I have no idea if I'm a woke crowd person, or if I'm the opposite.  I feel like the opposite.  When it comes to much of the PC stuff, I probably sound like a stuffy old fucker, or so my 18 yr old tells me.  Yes, I know here are some folks running around insisting on how we're to sign our names with a disclaimer that says (he/him) to notate our gender preferences, and there are others who scold Chappelle for picking on trans folks, but aren't they a tiny minority?  Is that pushing out the regular folk?  Or is what's pushing away the regular the folk the fact that the right has figured out how to message about these 5-10% of the left and turn them into what the right thinks is the majority of the Dem party?  I lean toward thinking it's more of the latter.

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:Why is it so difficult for the "new" Democratic party to listen to guys like James Carville, who have been around the block a few times? Are neither party interested in expanding the tent to garner more votes? The Republicans are happy kowtowing to the gun-toting fake Christians at the expense of moderates and the Democrats are happy kowtowing to the woke crowd, also at the expense of the moderates. Bill Maher had an excellent rant on this the other night. It's well worth a search.

I'm interested in knowing what it is you think Dems are doing to show moderates they don't want them in their tent?  I'm not saying you're wrong.  You might be 100% right.  I just don't really know what you think is the signal they're sending that's pushing them out.  I hear talk about the woke crowd, but I don't objectively know what that even is or even means.  I have no idea if I'm a woke crowd person, or if I'm the opposite.  I feel like the opposite.  When it comes to much of the PC stuff, I probably sound like a stuffy old fucker, or so my 18 yr old tells me.  Yes, I know here are some folks running around insisting on how we're to sign our names with a disclaimer that says (he/him) to notate our gender preferences, and there are others who scold Chappelle for picking on trans folks, but aren't they a tiny minority?  Is that pushing out the regular folk?  Or is what's pushing away the regular the folk the fact that the right has figured out how to message about these 5-10% of the left and turn them into what the right thinks is the majority of the Dem party?  I lean toward thinking it's more of the latter.

You hit on the seeming obsession with "what's your pronoun" and shit like that. Simena is kind of a loon, but she and Manchin are conservative Democrats, they aren't Trumpers as some make them out to be. Granted, the Democrats haven't kicked them out of the party like the Wyoming Republicans have done with Liz Cheney, but they aren't exactly making them feel welcome in the party. However, Dan Lipinski was run out of office because he committed the cardinal sin for the party by being pro-life, much like the Republicans would run a pro-choice member out of the party.


Hell, goofy Tliab suggested that we just close the federal prisons and release those prisoners. That kinda talk isn't going to go over well in middle America.


Did you watch the Bill Maher thing?

alohafri wrote:"Defund the police!" That didn't work out too well. Everyone needs to stop trying to convey their messages into a short chant-like phrase. Maybe someone needs to point out that goofy Abbott in Texas, by taking how many million dollars away from the Texas prison system to research a lost election is actually defunding the police! 


Call the Trumplicans out every time they step on their dicks with their actions. Every time the Trumplicans want to do a recount on a past election, ask about that person's faith in the election system. When they say that they have no faith in it, then ask them to call for a recount on their own election since it was they same system that got them elected.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:"Defund the police!" That didn't work out too well. Everyone needs to stop trying to convey their messages into a short chant-like phrase. Maybe someone needs to point out that goofy Abbott in Texas, by taking how many million dollars away from the Texas prison system to research a lost election is actually defunding the police! 


Call the Trumplicans out every time they step on their dicks with their actions. Every time the Trumplicans want to do a recount on a past election, ask about that person's faith in the election system. When they say that they have no faith in it, then ask them to call for a recount on their own election since it was they same system that got them elected.

Not sure if the party coined the "Defund the Police" slogan, or if it was coined by a stray extreme left person in the party.  Every time I'd hear ANY Dem asked about it, they said "no, don't defund it, but please reimagine it into something better."

Like I said before, by adding the word "too" to "Black Lives Matter" and it takes away the "all lives matter" response. I really don't know why these protesters don't run these things by me.

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:"Defund the police!" That didn't work out too well. Everyone needs to stop trying to convey their messages into a short chant-like phrase. Maybe someone needs to point out that goofy Abbott in Texas, by taking how many million dollars away from the Texas prison system to research a lost election is actually defunding the police! 


Call the Trumplicans out every time they step on their dicks with their actions. Every time the Trumplicans want to do a recount on a past election, ask about that person's faith in the election system. When they say that they have no faith in it, then ask them to call for a recount on their own election since it was they same system that got them elected.

Not sure if the party coined the "Defund the Police" slogan, or if it was coined by a stray extreme left person in the party.  Every time I'd hear ANY Dem asked about it, they said "no, don't defund it, but please reimagine it into something better."

Whatever. It was the message that was being sent. Nearly every protest had signs that said "Defund the Police". It's hard to walk that back once that cat's out of the bag.


Like I said before, by adding the word "too" to "Black Lives Matter" and it takes away the "all lives matter" response. I really don't know why these protesters don't run these things by me.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:"Defund the police!" That didn't work out too well. Everyone needs to stop trying to convey their messages into a short chant-like phrase. Maybe someone needs to point out that goofy Abbott in Texas, by taking how many million dollars away from the Texas prison system to research a lost election is actually defunding the police! 


Call the Trumplicans out every time they step on their dicks with their actions. Every time the Trumplicans want to do a recount on a past election, ask about that person's faith in the election system. When they say that they have no faith in it, then ask them to call for a recount on their own election since it was they same system that got them elected.

Not sure if the party coined the "Defund the Police" slogan, or if it was coined by a stray extreme left person in the party.  Every time I'd hear ANY Dem asked about it, they said "no, don't defund it, but please reimagine it into something better."

Whatever. It was the message that was being sent. Nearly every protest had signs that said "Defund the Police". It's hard to walk that back once that cat's out of the bag.


Like I said before, by adding the word "too" to "Black Lives Matter" and it takes away the "all lives matter" response. I really don't know why these protesters don't run these things by me.

I was never of the belief that there was a problem with the BLM slogan, mostly because it's true.  We don't add a "too" to "Save the Whales" or "Let's end breast cancer" or "Start seeing motorcycles" or "end drug abuse" because those are all good ideas.  The fact that "BLM" even needs to be stated is a sad statement about our culture.  Sure, maybe a "too" at the end of it helps to settle people down, but does it really?  Don't they still just say "all lives matter too?"  I don't see it making much of a difference.  I personally find "Black Lives Matter" to be a more powerful statement than "Black Lives Matter, too" because the former is such an obvious thing and shouldn't ever need to be said...and yet it did need to be said.

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:"Defund the police!" That didn't work out too well. Everyone needs to stop trying to convey their messages into a short chant-like phrase. Maybe someone needs to point out that goofy Abbott in Texas, by taking how many million dollars away from the Texas prison system to research a lost election is actually defunding the police! 


Call the Trumplicans out every time they step on their dicks with their actions. Every time the Trumplicans want to do a recount on a past election, ask about that person's faith in the election system. When they say that they have no faith in it, then ask them to call for a recount on their own election since it was they same system that got them elected.

Not sure if the party coined the "Defund the Police" slogan, or if it was coined by a stray extreme left person in the party.  Every time I'd hear ANY Dem asked about it, they said "no, don't defund it, but please reimagine it into something better."

Whatever. It was the message that was being sent. Nearly every protest had signs that said "Defund the Police". It's hard to walk that back once that cat's out of the bag.


Like I said before, by adding the word "too" to "Black Lives Matter" and it takes away the "all lives matter" response. I really don't know why these protesters don't run these things by me.

I was never of the belief that there was a problem with the BLM slogan, mostly because it's true.  We don't add a "too" to "Save the Whales" or "Let's end breast cancer" or "Start seeing motorcycles" or "end drug abuse" because those are all good ideas.  The fact that "BLM" even needs to be stated is a sad statement about our culture.  Sure, maybe a "too" at the end of it helps to settle people down, but does it really?  Don't they still just say "all lives matter too?"  I don't see it making much of a difference.  I personally find "Black Lives Matter" to be a more powerful statement than "Black Lives Matter, too" because the former is such an obvious thing and shouldn't ever need to be said...and yet it did need to be said.

Are you blind to the fact that the message that the far right is sending out is that "if black lives matter, that means that (fill in the blank with "white" or "blue") don't matter? We don't add a "too" to "Save the Whales" because there is no "too" to add to them that would be politically charged. Haven't you learned anything from reading the rants of Kark over the years? The lunatics are already turning on Kyle Rittenhouse because he told Fucker Carlson that he supports the BLM movement. You are correct that adding a "too" won't impact the lunatics, but if there are any sane people left, they might wonder, "how can you argue with that?"


And while I'm on a rant, the lunatic fringe of the left is just doing whatever they can to hand the midterms to the lunatic right by removing statues of Thomas Jefferson. I get and support the removal of the traitorious Confederates, but Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers? Give me a break. 

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

alohafri wrote:"Defund the police!" That didn't work out too well. Everyone needs to stop trying to convey their messages into a short chant-like phrase. Maybe someone needs to point out that goofy Abbott in Texas, by taking how many million dollars away from the Texas prison system to research a lost election is actually defunding the police! 


Call the Trumplicans out every time they step on their dicks with their actions. Every time the Trumplicans want to do a recount on a past election, ask about that person's faith in the election system. When they say that they have no faith in it, then ask them to call for a recount on their own election since it was they same system that got them elected.

Not sure if the party coined the "Defund the Police" slogan, or if it was coined by a stray extreme left person in the party.  Every time I'd hear ANY Dem asked about it, they said "no, don't defund it, but please reimagine it into something better."

Whatever. It was the message that was being sent. Nearly every protest had signs that said "Defund the Police". It's hard to walk that back once that cat's out of the bag.


Like I said before, by adding the word "too" to "Black Lives Matter" and it takes away the "all lives matter" response. I really don't know why these protesters don't run these things by me.

I was never of the belief that there was a problem with the BLM slogan, mostly because it's true.  We don't add a "too" to "Save the Whales" or "Let's end breast cancer" or "Start seeing motorcycles" or "end drug abuse" because those are all good ideas.  The fact that "BLM" even needs to be stated is a sad statement about our culture.  Sure, maybe a "too" at the end of it helps to settle people down, but does it really?  Don't they still just say "all lives matter too?"  I don't see it making much of a difference.  I personally find "Black Lives Matter" to be a more powerful statement than "Black Lives Matter, too" because the former is such an obvious thing and shouldn't ever need to be said...and yet it did need to be said.

Are you blind to the fact that the message that the far right is sending out is that "if black lives matter, that means that (fill in the blank with "white" or "blue") don't matter? We don't add a "too" to "Save the Whales" because there is no "too" to add to them that would be politically charged. Haven't you learned anything from reading the rants of Kark over the years? The lunatics are already turning on Kyle Rittenhouse because he told Fucker Carlson that he supports the BLM movement. You are correct that adding a "too" won't impact the lunatics, but if there are any sane people left, they might wonder, "how can you argue with that?"


And while I'm on a rant, the lunatic fringe of the left is just doing whatever they can to hand the midterms to the lunatic right by removing statues of Thomas Jefferson. I get and support the removal of the traitorious Confederates, but Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers? Give me a break. 

I can't answer for what any lunatic fringe does, or is doing.  They're going to run wild regardless of whatever some critical thinking moderate like you or I have to say.  

I tend to think that the sane people are the folks that understand why BLM exists, and that they probably aren't in need of the "too" at the end.  It's a semantic argument in the end.  

In the end, based on my viewing of the cultural trends toward statues, the Jefferson statues aren't going to be around for long.  I'm not stating this from the standpoint of my personal feelings or opinions about Jefferson.  I'm just saying that it's easy to see where the trend is heading, and considering TJ's history of slave ownership, slave impregnation, and other related experiences, it won't be long before it's decided by folks that the rights aren't enough to justify the wrongs.  Culture evolves, and that's where the current culture is headed.  And YES, that'll be held against Dems to whatever degree possible, but I don't think the party has it in them to manage the messaging.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:I don't think it's as simple as listening to Carville.  I like him, but he can be a bit of a loon.  The party is a diverse group and what works for some won't work for all.  If the party is suffering due to some kind of woke bullshit or too-left extremists, then those people aren't going to suddenly agree to no longer be what they are.  They are going to be that way, the same way the right is stuck with Boebert, and MTG and Gosar.  

Not sure it's that the left doesn't want to expand their tent.  I think they struggle to understand how to message that wish.  They are at a bit of a loss as for where to start.  As for Maher, I've always been a fan.  Lately he strikes me as a bit of a contrarian just to be a contrarian.  Frankly, I'm not displeased with what the Dems are doing right now.  I'm just displeased with how they convey it.

sharpy wrote:As Will Rogers once said, "I am a member of no organized political party, i am a democrat". You would think that Schumer and Pelosi would have called the team together and said "okay, we have 2 years to come together, organize our thoughts and put together a platform that will attract the most people to it. Now that means you leftists may not yet get all you want, and your right wing democrats may not get all that you want, but we HAVE to get together to prevent losing the House (which they will do) which will mean that we will never win another presidency again b/c they won't ratify it.  So come on, OCR - you give up some stuff - Joe - you bend a little... Let's get it together"  


But of course they didn't, they fight amongst themselves, come to nothing, pass nothing and in one year, democracy ends

blondy28 wrote:

sharpy wrote:As Will Rogers once said, "I am a member of no organized political party, i am a democrat". You would think that Schumer and Pelosi would have called the team together and said "okay, we have 2 years to come together, organize our thoughts and put together a platform that will attract the most people to it. Now that means you leftists may not yet get all you want, and your right wing democrats may not get all that you want, but we HAVE to get together to prevent losing the House (which they will do) which will mean that we will never win another presidency again b/c they won't ratify it.  So come on, OCR - you give up some stuff - Joe - you bend a little... Let's get it together"  


But of course they didn't, they fight amongst themselves, come to nothing, pass nothing and in one year, democracy ends

Nancy Pelosi doesn't a nice job whipping votes in her caucus.  Schumer is an idiot who is only watchable to see if his eyeglasses will fall off the end of his nose...they get lower each time I see him.  When they show clips of him on the floor trying to shame Mitch and the GOP, it's an embarassment.  I wish they would kick Schumer to the side and let Durbin take over as majority leader.