The electorate hates the insurance industry. They want a candidate who terrifies the insurance industry. Same as the utility industry. Same as the tech titans.
The electorate wants someone who fill fight back. Dems refused to give them that option, so they turned to trump.

#124 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

I agree entirely with the except of turning to Trump.

The electorate didn't turn to Trump. Trump kept his voter base and gained a small fraction of new votes (about 3 million IIRC).

Trump won not by being appealing to voters, he won by attrition and convincing people they shouldn't vote.

I'd put misogyny on the list of reasons for her loss.
I wouldn't strike it from the list. Would you?

#123 | Posted by snoofy

Of course, not. Read the nonsense from people like shrimpd*&^ or lfthndcuck et al and it's obvious that it was present.

But I'm not sure I would even put it in the top five reasons she lost considering those types weren't going to vote for her anyway.

Amy Klobuchar, Gretchen Whitmer, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris (no), AOC (no), Elissa Slotkin, Michelle Lujan Grisham, Maura Healey. Source ballotpedia.org

#120 | Posted by snoofy

What's your point?

I'd have to look into them a bit more because I recognize names but don't know enough about their politics and experiences to give a quick answer.

I already said that.

Is this where you start arguing with yourself in the form of a strawman position you're going to claim I hold?

The Soros machine would like a word with you.

#16 | Posted by lfthndthrds

I don't think you can name her.

#115 | Posted by snoofy

Off the top of my head, no I couldn't.

So, does that mean Harris lost because misogyny?

I'll bet that hurt to click "post."

I'm starting to think you're just an anti-Dem mole.

You can't post on any thread without railing on Dems and AIPAC but are mysteriously ALWAYS silent about the stronger connection between the GOP and AIPAC and the much stronger support the GOP gives Israeli actions abroad.

Right, so instead of breaking up the monopoly that strangles domestic producers and costs consumers, they just try to import more beef.

And people think these idiots are adept bithnithmen?

You have Admit, Rich Jews DO get Better Representation at All Levels than Everyone Else.

It seems rich anyone gets better representation than anyone else, sport.

But go ahead, keep letting that bigotry bubble up to the surface.

Why is it that everything to you is through the filter of Bibi, Israel, and your clear hatred of ...

He does seem to have an exceedingly unhealthy obsession with that singular issue.

How is your response functionally any different than when Republicans say teaching about slavery is bad because it makes the white people feel bad?
Same concept in play, just being applied to sexism. No?

#110 | Posted by snoofy

Sure, if you've buried your head so far up social wedge issues a&& that you can only see it through that lens as opposed to, oh I don't know, seeing it through reality that Harris was a terrible candidate who was handed the nomination she couldn't win on her own when she entered a primary after four unremarkable years of an extremely low profile VP stint?

But you're right, it's simply because she's a woman.

pick a woman with more credentials than "its her turn" or a SELECTED
illiterate slut who's only claim to fame...( other than "servicing" willie brown"
was repeating this stupid chit ....what can be, unburdened by what has been"

#103 | Posted by shrimptacodan

You know, people might treat you a little less harshly if you weren't such a proudly degenerate loser piece of s*&^.

Just sayin'.

Nominating a woman?
I agree this nation is currently way too misogynistic for a woman to win the presidency.

Thank you for elegantly and perfectly encapsulating why progressivism is a huge ick for most voters.

Well then you should be elated! You're getting exactly what you want, regressivism!
Best of luck with that whole science thing. Most people consider it progressive and worthless.

You're flailing. Rather desperately.

What's funnier is you don't know what the fuck you want.
It's almost like you're balled up in fetal position wishing it was 1997 again.
#92 | Posted by ClownShack

LOL another poster who's gonna take a crack at telling people what they think while they can barely assess the reality around them for what it is.

I know perfectly well what I want.

The GOP to move back towards the center.
The end of collaboration and cooperation and bipartisanship being considered toxic.
Both parties to stop pounding us with bulls*&^ social issues while core issues fester and die.
Reasonable regulations to protect citizen's finances, health, our environment and our children's futures.
Enforcement of anti-trust laws to push our economy back into something that's more than free market in name only.

Should I go on?

Did you see POTUS-level performance from the Community Organizer?

#85 | Posted by snoofy

More than AOC.

Successful lawyer in civil rights, community leader and state and federal level elected official.

He also had a gravitas and demeanor that was able to reach people. I don't see that quality in AOC whenever I hear her speak. I feel like she's typically saying the same things over and over and usually they're standard talking points.

You've never heard of Rick Wilson? That's kind of surprising.

No the DNC is doing that by burying their study on the reasons people hate them because we know what that study concludes - the people hate elitist corruption and want real populism.

#83 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

I don't disagree with you on that one tiny bit.

The perception of corporate capture of both parties is a huge turn off to a large portion of the electorate.

Problem is, how do you fix that if you stop participating?

You know what dems haven't tried against maga yet? An actual economic populist.
#82 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

No, they haven't.

But how do you see economic populism working out? The electorate has consistently voted for tax cuts and, foolishly I admit, decreases in social spending. They certainly won't vote for tax hikes or, more than likely, large scale social programs.

They just want to ability to work hard and make fair wages and a good living for doing so.