[-] [email protected] 18 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Grim days for the Democrats, just made me realize how much they missed Neera Tanden - their shitposter in chief. She hasn't shitposted as hard since her shitposts tanked her nomination for the first real job she could've had in 20 years. Say what you want about her, she has a bite and venom that is lacking with the current Biden campaign.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 4 hours ago

Still cracks me up to think that Mika's dad literally, and not figuratively, literally responsible for 911

[-] [email protected] 21 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

egghead

INCREMENTAL PROGRESS YEEEAA

HARDCORE

[-] [email protected] 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

One libshit consultant math they have is that Trump solidified his unruly base after the assassination attempt, so now he can pivot to the middle without the risk of being called sellout by his dumb chud base. Meanwhile Biden is having trouble energizing the base and pivoting at the same time.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 8 hours ago

It's been out for a while, it's called Pod Save America

[-] [email protected] 23 points 9 hours ago

Say what you want about the old school Killary Hilldawg Clinton operatives, but they lie, cheat, murder and fight to win; they even tried to wrangle superdelegates into brokered convention against Obama in '08. The Obamabros careerist vampires who run the Dems these days are just spineless jello homonculus with no principles.

89
submitted 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

https://archive.is/DLMIR

Earlier this year, I wrote a long story arguing that the dominant mood of the American political scene is the exhaustion of the anti-Trump coalition. While Donald Trump’s will to power, and that of his allies, burns hotter than ever, his opponents have slunk into resignation and despair.

I reiterated the theme in a column last week, suggesting the Democrats were prepared to essentially abdicate the presidency rather than undertake the difficult and painful work of confronting and replacing a candidate they believe can’t win.

This is a very strange explanation for political events — so strange I’ve often questioned my own thinking. Political parties exist in order to win. Sometimes they sacrifice their chances of winning to pursue other political goals (say, advocating an unpopular position they consider important). But the political-science models I learned as an undergraduate generally assume they are attempting to maximize their power in one form or another. There’s no factor in any model I know of to account for a party simply giving up. Yet a raft of new reports this weekend suggest precisely that. Consider the following items from the news in the immediate wake of the failed assassination attempt against Donald Trump.

Robert Costa reports:

“Those Democrats who have concerns about President Biden are now standing down, politically, will back President Biden, because of this fragile political moment. All of that talk of the debate faded almost instantly among my top Democratic sources as this unfolded. They say it’s time for the country to stick together, and that means Democrats sticking together as well.”

Costa is saying that Democrats who believe Biden is the wrong nominee for their party are “standing down.” The reason is that the country has to stick together and therefore Democrats also have to stick together. This rationale is incoherent, even contradictory. The country sticking together means something different from, and close to the opposite of, the parties cohering internally. President Biden is deeply unpopular.

There’s no theory of national unity that requires Democrats to stand behind a president disliked by the entire Republican Party and most independents, unless the theory is to give up on trying to win the election and let Trump have it.

Crazy as it sounds, that may be the theory. NBC quotes a “longtime Democratic insider” complaining, ‘“We’re so beyond fucked,” as well as “a veteran Democratic consultant” who says, “The presidential contest ended last night,” and, “Now it’s time to focus on keeping the Senate and trying to pick up the House. The only positive thing to come out of last night for Democrats is we are no longer talking about Joe Biden’s age today.”

Semafor quotes a Democrat in Congress who supports Biden as the nominee, who moans, “That’s the whole fucking election. Every image from that is iconic and couldn’t have been created on a Hollywood movie.” The belief, to be clear, is that Biden cannot win and the Democrats should not try to nominate a different presidential candidate. Politico’s Playbook this morning has a blind quote from a Democratic aide who wants to replace Biden but says, “I think this is over.” And finally, a “senior House Democrat” tells Axios, “We’ve all resigned ourselves to a second Trump presidency.” When I wrote about the fraying of the anti-Trump coalition, my main focus was on its edges. The most left-wing portions of the coalition were disgusted with Biden’s support for Israel, and the most conservative elements were bizarrely focused on punishing Biden in response to his left-wing critics.

The sagging morale on display right now is taking place within the very heart of the Democratic Party. It does not have an especially pronounced ideological character. The party is responding to the shock of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump by standing down its efforts to deny him office.

The spirit of the last two days is strikingly reminiscent of the post-9/11 atmosphere. Democrats decided en masse that national unity required withholding all political criticism of the Bush administration. Democrats actively praised Bush’s leadership, putting aside all questions of his administration’s failure to heed warnings of the attacks. The news media followed suit, pulling Phil Donahue (at the time the only liberal voice on prime-time cable news) off the air in favor of a flag-waving message.

The mainstream media painted George W. Bush as a transformed man, jolted into seriousness and elevated to statesmanship by the call of history. Republicans proclaimed he had been divinely chosen to lead the nation. (While it has been forgotten in embarrassment, the Bush personality cult rivaled the current Trump cult in its scope and quasi-theological character). Republicans used the moment to delegitimize all critiques of their leader as unpatriotic. Many Democrats, carrying out what they believed was their responsible institutional role, complied. The result of this dangerously unbalanced equation was a comprehensive political and moral disaster.

The current moment bears many of the same traits. You have the mainstream news media depicting the Republican leader as a newly sober and changed figure, an intensified personality cult on the right, all of which are pressuring Democrats to silence or dampen their critiques. The news media is both following and driving the changes — MSNBC has temporarily pulled Morning Joe off the air for fear a guest would utter an offensive remark, echoing its post-9/11 instincts.

Democrats may not be rallying to Trump as they did to Bush, but they have followed the herdlike instinct to depict the assassination attempt as though it cleanses him of sin. Here is another quote, from a senior Democratic Senate aide, in Semafor’s story: Trump “was already on track to win and the fact that he is now a victim of political violence rather than the perpetrator undermines Biden’s core appeal [emphasis added].” Trump did not stop being a perpetrator of political violence because he was targeted. Nor did the danger of his authoritarian inclinations shrink. But Trump has seen an opportunity to use the tragedy to reshape his image, and the opposition feels either helpless in the face of it or resigned to cooperate.

The most revealing thing about the Democratic response is the confessions by Democrats that they can’t or shouldn’t continue their efforts to replace Biden as the nominee. Of course, some Democrats believe Biden is their strongest nominee, or that the act of replacing him would itself do more harm than good. Their behavior is rational.

What isn’t rational is the decision by Democrats who believe a different candidate would stand a better chance of winning but who have decided to give up. For them, the assassination attempt provides an excuse to avoid the intraparty conflict this undertaking would require, with all its professional risks and personal discomfort.

And while the current moment, with its calls to “lower the temperature” and wishcasting of a new Trump, is likely to expire much faster than the post-9/11 Bush rally, it doesn’t need to last long to have irreversible effects. Biden is playing for time. The longer Democrats drag out their choice, the greater his odds of outlasting his doubters and securing the nomination.

Nothing about the last two days made Biden’s plan for beating Trump more plausible. The plan, to the extent one existed, consisted of hoping the polls were wrong and/or that the passage of time would make voters focus more on their concerns regarding Trump and less on their concerns with the incumbent. What has changed is that his intraparty skeptics have begun succumbing to defeatism. Having passed through the stages of denial, anger, and bargaining, they are progressing to depression, then inevitably to acceptance. If you have a certain institutional mind-set, it is easy to rationalize this surrender as an act of responsibility. But it is not. It is sad and pathetic.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

IT'S HAMBERDERS TIME

[-] [email protected] 39 points 17 hours ago

Stage 3: bargaining

stress

66
submitted 17 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

https://archive.is/TjfS7

On a human level, he kinda has to, right?

79
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

It was an inside job by Kamisato Clan

[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

It is an image that captures him as he would like to be seen, so perfectly, in fact, that it may outlast all the rest.

Nothing will outlast

feast

[-] [email protected] 40 points 2 days ago

Genocide is absolutely unacceptable

I wish the people of Gaza to stand strong, and people who have been hurt, especially the children of Gaza a speedy recovery

IS IT THAT HARD TO SAY BERNIE

105
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
83
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

stonks-down

143
It's JOEVER (hexbear.net)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

https://archive.is/qoiL1

Thirty minutes into the presidential debate, I’ve heard from three veteran Democratic presidential campaign officials, and all of them had the same reaction to President Biden’s performance: This is a disaster. It wasn’t just that Biden wasn’t landing a glove on Donald Trump on the economy, the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Covid, taxes, temperament or anything else that was coming up in the questioning. It was Biden’s voice (low and weak) and facial expression (frozen, mouth open, few smirks) with answers that were rambling or vague or ended in confusion. He gave remarks about health care and abortion that didn’t make a strong point, giving Trump a chance to say lines like, “I really don’t know what he said at the end of that sentence. I don’t think he knows what he said, either.” One of the Democrats said Biden looked scared. Another said it was an “emperor has no clothes” performance so far. The third said of the performance overall, “Don’t ask.” Trump lied repeatedly during the debate about the pandemic, immigration and Roe v. Wade, but Biden didn’t hold him accountable for those lies in a memorable way. At times, Trump attacked Biden, but the president didn’t fight back. Frank Luntz, a veteran focus group moderator who was holding a live focus group during the debate, wrote of their reactions so far: “The group is so bothered by Biden’s voice and appearance. But they’re getting madder and madder with Trump’s personal attacks.” “If Trump talks less,” Luntz said, “he wins. If Biden doesn’t stop talking, he loses.”

101
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
105
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

tldr; just a lib complaining about direct action. This is the most baffling column from the NYT, surpassing all of Friedman's or Dowd's brain diarrheas

https://archive.is/hPWPv

Don’t take it personally, but I don’t want to go to your protest. This isn’t a commentary about your particular movement or about the anti-Israel rallies this past academic year. I don’t care how foolish or noble the cause. When it comes to gathering in large groups and yelling, you can count me out. I did try it once. My first and last protest was freshman year of college when some women I liked were organizing a pro-choice rally. The cause was solid, it seemed like a decent way to solidify the friendships and I enjoy using magic markers.

But standing on the campus green of our overwhelmingly liberal university brandishing a broken hanger struck me as not only futile but ridiculous. The only mind that was changed by that protest was mine — about participating in protests. After 40 minutes or so, I left to go to the bathroom. Later, I signed up to escort patients at a local abortion clinic. There are better ways, I realized, to effect change.

Temperamentally, I just wasn’t up to it. It’s not only that I don’t like standing outdoors in the sun for long periods or that I always need to pee. But I’d rather read about strikers in “Germinal” than march on a picket line. My full gratitude then, to The New York Times for giving me a get-out-of-jail-free card by forbidding your journalists from participating in political protests while encouraging us to report on them.

I’ve never been much of a tribalist or a joiner, and have no use for conformity of thought or dress. Unless it’s Halloween or a costume party, I don’t like playing dress-up. Nor do I want to be part of a group where people might think I accidentally left my pussy hat at home. When I see a bunch of white kids wearing kaffiyehs I can’t help wonder whatever happened to the whole anti-cultural appropriation thing. When someone drones on about “solidarity,” all I hear is, “Get in line.” When there’s no room for dissent from the dissent, there’s no room for me. Color me an anti-fan of performative politics, particularly if it means I’d be part of the show that features bigots posing as bleeding hearts. Plus, all that earnestness! It brings out my ironic and impish side, inclined to correct typos on signage or foment some kind of peripheral debate. Every time someone at one of those encampments cried out “Free Palestine” I’d be tempted to yell “From Hamas!” I’d surely get kicked out of the group that wants to kick other people out. They don’t want troublemakers.

Protests are about operating in unison and I find that creepy. Back in the early 90s, I visited college friends in Washington, D.C. It happened to be the Fourth of July and so we headed to the National Mall to celebrate. I was stunned to find people passionately yelling en masse, “U.S.A.! U.S.A.!” What, I wondered, was the alternative? Who’s the other team?

I realize we live in a country born of protest and my attitude may seem vaguely un-American. Watching the rabble-rousers on HBO’s “John Adams” during Covid lockdown, my first grumbly thought was, “Stop whining and pay your taxes!” Reading about the Whiskey Rebellion made me think of drunken MAGA types sloganeering at a Trump rally about the glory of firearms. (I do make a sentimental exception for revolutions set to music, especially when French.) Speaking of history, I can’t say I’d relish hollering alongside people who’ve only studied it on TikTok. But those of us who read about it in, say, books usually come to understand that even factual history is complicated, nuanced and full of boring and endless repetition.

Protests, those books remind us, can end poorly. In 2020, when people were posting black squares on Instagram to show their antiracist cred, I insisted that we watch “To Live” for family movie night. Zhang Yimou’s depiction of the Cultural Revolution provides a terrifying warning to those who think offering children a bullhorn is a good idea. Still, plenty of Boomers view protest through a nostalgic filter. Sure, there was some passionate shouting on the quad about wiping out Jews, they’ll say, but even the righteous antiwar movement had its Hanoi Janes and the Weather Underground. Is painting a Hamas symbol on a Jews’s door worse than settler-colonial oppression? But no matter the context and whether it comes from the right or the left, antisemitism is a bad look.

Maybe the protesters could use a moment of peace and reflection. A chance to take a deep breath and open their minds. Picture, if you will, a meditative room filled with floor pillows, breathwork exercises and a small but well-curated bookshelf in the corner. Perhaps now that we’ve gathered here all kumbaya-like, we can even offer a word for the people who look at the bawlers, the get-ups, the outrage and the zealotry and say to themselves, “No, thank you.” Here’s to the people who doth protest not

30
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

My favorite content creator just dropped a banger. Give the video a look

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPLgpVlYxQE

153
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
78
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
188
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

https://x.com/IPCC_CH/status/1797608800649621828

Imagine not having >75yr old male dinosaurs as president

view more: next ›

micnd90

joined 3 years ago