Pete1111
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pete1111
-
-
On 11/28/2023 at 8:20 PM, stevenkesslar said:
I was gone for a week, so a slow response.
I don't disagree with the merit of your argument at all. But that's not my point.
In politics, perception is reality. Not to be elitist, but in the age of MAGA one might add that ignorance is bliss. Although ignorant populism is nothing new, on any partisan side. So I would not be shocked if Palestinian Americans in Michigan are the new Jill Steins and Ralph Naders, who help elect exactly what they don't really want: Trump. At least in the case of Palestinian Americans it won't be because they rally behind Trump. More likely it will be that they feel like Biden betrayed them, and they just won't vote. That is how many if not the majority of them feel now. But the election is a year away.
The population of Michiganders with Palestinian ancestry is around 6,000.
It is a good point though, that the Democrats should keep their eye on the ball in Michigan. The reason Biden won in Michigan is the much higher number of voters that turned out to vote against Trump in 2020 versus the 2016 cycle. How might the Dems create that scenario again?
IMO the Democrats do not employ the kind of strategies and modern tools the conservative side uses to capture and maintain the support of registered voters.
Although voter registration initiatives in Georgia led by Stacey Abrahms deserve recognition for turning Georgia and the Senate blue, IMO the Democrats have left Abrahms in the dust. Should Abrahms have received higher praise from the Party and should her effort have been repeated nationwide?
Or are the Dems "all talk" while they send out donation requests then sit back and assume everyone will just do the right thing and vote Blue?
I hope not.
That said, if the polls are correct that many Dems oppose Biden's approach to the Israel/Gaza conflict, then we could be watching the administration throw away re-election chances.
Does it seem Biden has given Israel a blank check to bomb at will?
Netanyahu should accept responsiblity for failure to defend against the attack and resign before the US gives Israel any more support.
- unicorn and stevenkesslar
-
2
-
3 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:
Thank you.
At least we can be honest here. I am just getting sick of it. It's not just the illegal aliens. All these un-American woke sissies at Harvard should just be deported to their respective shitholes. And I know. The Woke ACLU will say they were born here. I don't give a fuck. Just build a fucking wall around Harvard and let the sissies and Jew haters stay in their fucking woke wonderland.
I am tired of hearing all this fucking whining about Palestinian women and children. There is nothing morally wrong with wiping 20,000 terrorists off the face of the earth. In fact, it is anti-Semitic to whine about blowing those 20,000 terrorists up. It's just less immigrant filth to poison our blood.
There is only only leader whose people march FOR Jews and FOR Israel. Donald "My Son-In-Law Is The Best Jew Ever" Trump!
_crop.jpg)
We need a strong leader who has the back of the Jews!
There is nothing wrong when the people the country belongs to want to make it great again and decide to rid their country of filth. We're not haters just because wir wollen reines Blut!
One might remind ourselves that when Maga isn't blaming the corrupt news and corrupt political actions on the influence of George Soros, that Trump has told us, (and he was very strong), how there are good people on both sides.
That said, while Trump describes how the flow of immigrants at the border has increased bigly due to outflows from prisons and mental institutions, the reality is a benefit to our US economic engine: young, cheap labor willing to get out of bed and go to work every day.
-
On 12/24/2023 at 10:57 AM, stevenkesslar said:
It's fun to watch how you deny every fact from every poster. including by posting graphics that mean nothing. Obviously this is not the place for a factual debate
But here's an idea. Lets' swap places. Just for fun, I'll be you and defend the sadist butcher!
Look!
Every country in world love Russia.
Every country in world buys oil from Russia and glorious economy. US love glorious leader of Russia. UK loves glorious leader of Russia. Germany loves glorious leader of Russia.
This is a fact! Why do all these countries love glorious Russia and want to be like Russia? Because they love glorious Russian leader and want to be like vibrant and most powerful economy of whole world- Russia! it is a fact!
Just ask Trump. He said it very strong yesterday that Putin is a better leader than Biden.
Putin will raise oil drilling bigly while Sleepy Joe is the most corrupt leader the world has ever seen.
Believe me!
Regarding immigrants
the GOP will try scaring the $$$ out of you by saying whatever it takes to get you to open your wallet, just like televangelists do.
In either case, after they have your money, they have no viable agenda or policy other than vote for them and/or pray.
-
Who will expense dear Rudy his scotch and private transportation?
-
Another somewhat recent example how it is OK" to be gay and/or play gay,
In Space Station 76, a straight character was played by a gay actor and a gay character was played by a straight actor. Love that movie. I'm not at all affected as a viewer knowing the actor's sexuality is not the same as the character's. The performances were spot on! The creators were queer. A funky movie that didn't get enough hype.
-
Even if he read Hitler speeches would he remember what he read?
Or is someone reminding him how to pander to his base?
That said, Trump has never been shy about his Jewish friends.
In the end, Trump is twice the age of Hitler. I don't mean to sound ageist, and bless his heart, but TFG doesn't pull off his Nazi routine well. He sounds less like a screaming der Führer and more like a big balloon wheezing out through its unfastened flap.
- Marc in Calif, alvnv and Bingo T Dog
-
1
-
2
-
7 hours ago, forky123 said:
Saw Jonathan Bailey in Beautiful Thing at the Sound Theatre, London in 2006. The theatre was a small one where the stage was fairly small and the seating wrapped around it. The front row of the audience was roughly a metre or so from the actors and effectively on the stage. Jonathan was amazing at such a young age. I think that theatre and show is one of my all time favorites as sitting so close to the actors made you feel part of the action.
Live theater can really show an actor's true colors as far as their acting chops. I'm not surprised how good you say Bailey was in Beautiful Thing.
All the players were good in Fellow Travelers, but for me Bailey was the best part, every scene he was in.
I look forward to seeing more from him, whether gay or straight roles.
-
41 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:
That's so Gay!
If I admit publicly that I prefer Straight Ryan kissing Straight Emma, is someone going to accuse me of being homophobic? Or, worse, that I'm un-woke? 😯
For the record, just so they don't put a stamp in my Gay card, they could have cast Jonathon Bailey instead of Ryan Gosling. And he would have been just as cute, but more Gay.
Gosling got his start singing and dancing on the Mickey Mouse Club which is kinda gay. And yes, Ken getting kissed by two other Kens when he hugs them is pretty gay.
Gerwig showed how Ken was perfectly fine with it, because, as the OP asked,
Yes, being gay is
OK.
-
2 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:
An interesting compare and contrast to me is Fellow Travelers and Red, White, and Royal Blue. Both movies have great eye candy. One is getting mostly rave reviews, and will probably get lots of awards. The other is a fan favorite, but got trashed as superficial by many critics. It won't be taking home Oscars. Both have Gay directors and writers, which informs the content and tone - whether the actors are queer or not.
If you put me on a desert island and said I can have only one of those movies to watch for the rest of my life, it is a no brainer. Red, White, and Royal Blue. I view it as a Gay fairy tale. To paraphrase Matthew Lopez, he wanted the film to reflect the past, but point toward the future. It makes me feel hopeful, and good.
I usually like serious movies, and skip the Marvel stuff. But I am half way in to Fellow Travelers. And I am having to force myself to watch it. I get the point. The director said in a great interview that he wanted to show our community had all this shit thrown at us - the lavender scare, AIDS - and we survived. I take the series as a compliment, and testament to the resilience of LGBTQ folk. That said, it is just depressing to watch. Part of my own emotional reaction is, "Okay. Okay. Enough heavy gay stuff. Let's have the RWRB sequel, okay? With more nudity."
I don't really mean that. It's a good thing that we can now have high budget and well made dramatic series by Gays, and for Gays, that lots of people who are not Gay like. But I'd rather live in a world where it is mostly all mixed up. And whether you are Gay or Black or a woman isn't the whole or even the main point - most of the time.
Same for casting. I agree with you @Pete1111 that I'd rather have queer baiting restored to its original meaning: what Joe McCarthy did. And stop picking on Straight actors who do a good job playing queer roles.
Since I started this thread, it is interesting that Taylor Zakhar Perez's "outing" has been much ado about nothing. I put outing in parentheses because whether he is even out, or has been outed, is a question. But he has basically lived by his character's principles. Which is that the choice to come out - or not - is personal. That said, what happened all over the internet after the movie came out suggests that fans are simply not going to tolerate leaving the slate completely blank. They have filled in the blanks with photos and videos that strongly suggest he is happily Gay, and happily married.
I think it's a good look for TZP. You can talk about me all you want. But I don't have to confirm or deny anything you say. Kind of like the McCarthy hearings. But a lot better. 😉
I agree, Fellow Travelers was a bit of a chore for me too, but I recognize how a lot of people do like it. There are a lot of great scenes.
But, I enjoyed Ryan Gosling getting kissed on both cheeks by two guys during the #I'mJustKen dance scene in Barbie, more than all the graphic sex in Fellow Travelers put together. Maybe I am just a victim of Queer Baiting.
Skip to 3:45 for the male dance sequence and queer-baiting man-on-man kisses.
-
On 9/7/2023 at 8:13 PM, stevenkesslar said:
So I'm starting this thread to put a positive spin on where we are in 2023. There are three threads that start with negatives - Spacey's court verdict, an Asian boy band predator, and an overall discussion about "wokeness" in films and plays. Tangentially, we could throw in Bernstein and Bradley Cooper as a ridiculous example of "nose-baiting," which I guess is kinda like "queer-baiting." 🤔
So this will be a long rambling think piece. But I'll summarize my two main points.
First, I'm delighted that we have broader, better, and more positive representation of queers in films than ever before. I'll use Red White & Royal Blue, Heartstoppers, and Uncoupled as examples. I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein to make a few points, too.
Second, while it's easier to be a Gay character in a film, it seems like we still have a mess on our hands in terms of whether it's actually okay to be a Gay or Bi actor. At one extreme, the concept of "queer-baiting" suggests everyone should come out, even by force, and mostly or only play roles that match their real life sexual orientation. In real life, Kit O'Connor was forced out, with this idea used as an excuse for cruelty. TZP is being outed right now, all over the world. Not for queer-baiting, but for being queer. But what that means is fans are collecting and commenting on things he posted on social media for about a decade. I would not call it cruel. But I would call it a mess. Meanwhile, we have what I'll call the Luke Macfarlane standard. Which is "just be honest about who you are." That seems to work these days.
That's one of my favorite clips from one of my favorite LGBTQ films, The Celluloid Closet. So I'll use it to do a compare and contrast between three time periods over a quarter century apart: 1962, 1995, and today.
When The Celluloid Closet came out in 1995, it was itself a sign that it was just becoming okay to talk about how queers are portrayed on film. I'm a fan of Lillian Hellman. But I agree with MacLaine. They had no idea what they were doing. They were totally unaware. Had they been lesbians, in real life, they almost certainly would have been more aware. And they almost certainly never would have been cast, or had successful careers. MacLaine is being a bit hard on herself, and her character. What was one supposed to do in 1962, when most people still thought being a lesbian actually was a disease?
The spate of new Gay films I named, all rom coms or love stories, suggest that we really have learned a lot about representation of queers in film since 1995. There's a nice thread on Company Of Men of posters' favorite LGBTQ films. Almost all of them were made after The Celluloid Closet. This is why.
I love both Heartstoppers and RWRB. I've read the criticisms of RWRB. That it's a mediocre Hallmark movie, based on fan fiction that reads like Marvel dialogue. But I think the book and film are so successful because they summarize and dramatize decades of learned LGBTQ wisdom. I'll single out one line that I've seen criticized repeatedly as Marvelesque: "Starting today I shall no longer be the prince of shame and secrets." That line, and much of the movie, could have been written as a direct response to The Children's Hour. Finally, we have Gay adults, in Uncoupled, and a Gay and Bi teen, in Heartstoppers, and a Gay prince and Bi First Son, in RWRB, who are willing to fight for their queer love. No wonder the world loves it.
I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein. One person who posts here commented that it's one of the saddest movies he ever saw. I agree that it is sad. But I also see it as hopeful. I loved it. It is significant that it was the most successful LGBTQ movie ever in Taiwan. And the most successful movie of 2020 in Taiwan, period. I thought both the movie and its success was a recognition of how growing up in a culture like the one portrayed in The Children's Hour makes it challenging, but not impossible, to live a happy queer life with a partner. The other Asian movie I finally saw this year that I'd compare it to is Bishonen, from Hong Kong in 1999. It did prove you could cast gorgeous young Straight ABC actors, who would become friends in real life and have very successful careers. But the film was a flop. And like The Children's Hour it carried the message that these queer romances never end well. These are two examples of good LGBTQ cinema that makes it very easy to understand why audiences, especially young audiences, love the idea that we really can have queer fairy tales now. Where boy meets boy and does live happily ever after.
In terms of whether boy actor can meet boy and fall in love in real life, I feel like we are at about 1995. Meaning we are just starting to be able to talk about it. In that TIME article I hyperlinked, Your Name Director Patrick Liu talked about using a trumpet as a symbol of "a sound quality of wanting to say something, but not being able to get it out." That seems to be where we still are. One anecdotal proof of concept is Kevin Spacey himself. He won his first Oscar right around when The Celluloid Closet came out. I don't blame him for prioritizing privacy, and his career. We know how Don't Ask, Don't Tell turned out in that era. So you can take that as an indicator that it was better for him not to tell the world he was Gay at that time.
Kit O'Connor, 18, did not want to come out as Bisexual. He did mostly thanks to the cruelty of Twitter, in his own words. But taken to its extreme, "queer-baiting" means any actor, even a teen, should be required to declare his sexuality. Then we know whether it matches the character he plays. It's ridiculous.
Polo Marin, Mexico's most popular Gay actor, was outed twice in his mid-20's. What he said in this interview captured some important nuances:
Then there is Luke MacFarlane, who along with a lot of other Gay actors - like much of the cast of Uncoupled - is setting what I view as the gold standard.
There's also the argument that, essentially, fans should not be fans. Or even human. We have no right to know anything about these people. One really good response I read from some actor to some question once was, "I like to keep my private life private." That's fair.
That said, what both Marin and Macfarlane capture is that this does not happen in isolation. And it is a two way street. Marin wanted to be a role model for others. And now he is. Macfarlane made a pragmatic decision that he could afford to be honest to his fans. First, there's absolutely zero evidence that fans are going to stop acting like fans just because you are Gay. Second, he calculated he could be honest because his fans would love him and respect him for who he is. He was right. Plus, being honest is always easier.
Out of curiosity, I Googled to see who the most private celebrities in the world are. I came up with this list. I think it is telling. If these are the most private celebrities in the world, we know a hell of a lot about them. Like their spouses, whether they have kids, their divorces. So if the idea is that fans are evil for wanting to know these things, good luck with that.
I'll single out Matt Damon. Like MacFarlane, he seems to be a wise guy who figured out how to get ahead of the curve. Several friends have told me the story about how Damon is the kind of down to earth guy who would meet his wife in a hotel bar, where she was bartending. He is not so private that he didn't share with the world that his wife helped him through a period of depression. It makes perfect sense that celebrities who value privacy for their family try to manage it by curating what their fans get to know. I think they are wise.
On the other hand, Harry Styles has proved you can do very well by essentially saying, I could care less what people say about me or my sexuality. He said there is going to be a set of narratives, anyway. And he feels no need to control or shape them. Although I suspect Harry can say that because it actually helps shape the Harry Styles mystique. It still means that his fans know he is dating Olivia Wilde, who wisely calls Harry's fans "kind."
And now Taylor Zakhar Perez is in the global hot seat. Which is more proof that we're now better at portraying queers in film than we are at knowing how to talk about queer actors in real life.
It is easy enough to blame TZP for about a decade's worth of queerish content he posted on social media. It is also easy enough to blame fans (or not fans) for caring about queerish content he posted on social media. I don't feel either are very fair to TZP, or his fans. But it does prove that if you are a nobody who becomes a big somebody on social media, keeping your private life private is next to impossible. So, like Damon or MacFarlane, it probably makes sense to think that through as early as you can.
On Company Of Men I have raved repeatedly about how Galitzine finally came out as Straight in an interview with a Gay reporter at Variety when RWRB opened. It's funny that some fans on social media still think it's a ruse, and he didn't really say it or mean it. Fans will always be fans. I'm guessing that Galitzine and RWRB Director Matthew Lopez had to have talked about that interview. Galitzine kind of put Lopez on the hook by saying he wanted to discuss this with the openly Gay director right out of the gate, before he was cast. I view the interview as an honest and wise way to get ahead of any possible queer-baiting or outing adventures regarding Galitzine and RWRB. It is too much to hope that it will permanently end queer-baiting, and more cruel attacks on actors like Kit O'Connor. But it is a big step in the right direction.
Even though RWRB was brilliantly scripted as a movie, and there seems to have been a script to undermine any possible queer-baiting backlash in real life, there is no apparent script for dealing with the fact that one of the two lead actors is Gay, or Bi, and married to a man. TZP could have gone to Variety and talked about being a queer actor in a queer movie. If these guys are as smart as I think they are, it suggests maybe there is a script. Like Harry Styles, TZP may have decided he is fine with fans developing any narrative they want. For now, at least. Fans are already deep into speculation about whether he shares his husband's somewhat more conservative political beliefs. That's a good reason to value privacy these days!
I do hope this results in a lot more behind the scenes reflection on how Hollywood can do better. We now have lots of examples of queer actors who were outed. So it makes perfect sense that in the future queer actors should factor in that if they get their wish, and are wildly successful, they may not have a choice.
The concept that curious fans should stop being curious fans is ridiculous. This is fun for me in part because it so NOT me. When I watched My Policeman with a Gay friend recently, he actually had to explain to me who Harry Styles is. I'd never heard of him. I skipped Kissing Booth 2 because I could care less about TZP, but wanted to know how the cheesy story in Kissing Booth 1 ended. Now I've been following gossip websites I've never heard of, and reading articles in magazines I never read, to see how we got to TZP being outed.
So I'll point to one example of an article that is kind of innocuous, but also a perfect example of the problem. Right when Kissing Booth 2 was being released, TZP was interviewed by Glamour. Here's a few snippets:
First of all, let's stop pretending that magazines like Glamour, or almost any other magazine or website in the world, are going to stop asking questions like that. So sexuality is on the table. Because they know that's what fans want to know.
None of those answers are dishonest. But they are somewhat misleading, and a bit transparent. A few months later, if you Google it, there are all these articles in which TZP says he is not dating Joey King, who is a friend. And he wonders where fans even got that idea. Geez, who knows? 😉 A few people in these 100+ page "outing" discussions on TZP have speculated that Galitzine, having more experience, is more media savvy. That may be true. Glamour is clearly not doing upcoming queer actors any favors by asking these questions. I'm guessing TZP might have been thinking, "I could tell you. But then I'd have to kill my career."
I'd be fine if we all just forgot about queer-baiting and instead focused on how the entertainment industry can help the LGBTQ actors who are starting to break through to just be who they are. We know Hollywood could exist for most of its history without outing queer actors. The old solution was they had to lie and be something they were not. I'm fine with the new solution being silence. At least for some people, for some time. If queer actors like Macfarlane want to tell the world they're Gay, and married to a guy, great. My bias is I'd rather they all come out. But if they don't want to, edit the question out of the interview. It's clear that a lot of this is discussed with directors and publicists in private. At least with some actors. So change the script.
That said, now that TZP has gotten his wish, after what sounds like a decade or so of endless auditions, I'm guessing 99 % of the world will overlook these trivial things. If it makes anyone look bad, it should be the industry that insists on pigeonholing sex symbols into stereotypes.
I have no idea what a better solution is for the awkwardness of being queer but not being ready to come out. The good news to me is that the increasingly viable long term solution is what Macfarlane did in 2008. Be honest. It did not end his career. He actually says it has helped his career. I hope he is right.
I disagree with the term queer baiting. I don't like how that term has been stolen from its original use. To me, it is insulting and disrespectful to true victims of queer baiting wrought by the police and bashers.
That said, even gay directors admit they prefer freedom who they cast, with no requirement to confirm where the actor lands on the Kinsey scale.
I was at a Q&A for Call Me by Your Name where a woke young woman asked Luca Gudagnino why he didn't cast gay actors in the lead. He asked her if only those that practice cannibalism should be cast for a cannibal role.
In CMBYN, neither character landed at Kinsey scale 6.0. So yeah, the queer baiting idea itself is as messy as it is futile.
I prefer watching actors that are talented and nice looking. Sadly, the "nice looking" is the piece attacked as queer baiting when a role is not awarded to an out actor.
Fellow Travelers cast gay actors in the lead rolls, a successful choice.
Bailey and Bomer have both successfully played straight and gay roles. I have no problem when straight or closeted actors do the same. In the end, casting is a business decision, like it or not. Casting affects the product. Directors need the largest available population of choices that make sense for the role.
Back to the "positive" theme of the OP. HBO recently streamed Angels in America during World Aids Day. I love Al Pacino. He was fantastic playing Roy Cohn. I have also seen him play a gay role live on stage. Again he is an amazing actor. Angels in America was produced nearly 20 years ago. HBO and Al Pacino thought it was "OK" to play gay content back then. In the ensuing years, as "old thinking" has transitioned out of the industry, playing gay and being gay in Hollywood has become more and more "OK".
But it would be blind to ignore reality. For example there are regions in Poland that recently voted themselves "LGBTQ free zones." Some religions in the States still preach that gay men risk burning in Hell. Therefore, marketing entertainment with gay content is probably a tricky path.
So kudos to the actors and content creators that took risks decades ago, helping move the ball in the right direction towards a time where it is OK to be gay or play gay in Hollywood.
As far as Asia, my sense is that places like Bangkok, Hong Kong and Taiwan are regions where gay actors are "ok", e.g. Leslie Cheung in Happy Together (R.I.P)
-
1 hour ago, floridarob said:
The problem is the immigrant haters lump all immigrants into that...asylum seekers are legal, since seeking asylum is legal, but I'll bet you won't accept that either.
As far as the polls, too early still. I ran for politics in Texas years ago, most people make their final decision when they step into the voting booth, both sides have their steadfast voters, but it's the undecided and independents that swing the vote.
If Trump looses, will be a repeat of last time...A continuation of his election denial would be no surprise.
Sadly the Repubs use the border to stir up the electorate and win votes. They have not passed any new immigration policy, long time.
-
On 12/9/2023 at 9:04 PM, TotallyOz said:
I don't see these kinds of threads on SGT. Why?
May I ask, what is SGT?
-
Freeman gave quite a sermon after and reminded there is more to come.
Is Miss Lindseybelle on this mix?
-
4 hours ago, unicorn said:
Another clarification: freedom of speech doesn't quite mean the government can't prohibit ANY speech. Prohibited speech includes defamation/slander, threats, fraud, and perjury.
...as well as other speech that harms the judicial process can be prohibited.
-
On 12/1/2023 at 4:51 PM, stevenkesslar said:
The Change Campaign That Can Contest America
I thought that was an interesting set of polls from (Bill) Clintonista pollster Stan Greenberg. Greenberg is the spouse of Rep. Rosa DeLauro, who more than anyone else is Congress championed the expanded child tax credit that cut child poverty in half in 2021. Until the Republicans refused to reauthorize it.
The whole 80 page report is worth reading. Which you can do by hitting the first download button under the PDF image. This report is consistent with the populist economic ideas that Greenberg has been polling and pushing for years. Here is a brief summary:
That squares with lots of other polls, and my view of reality. I recall a poll taken right after the expanded monthly child tax credits went away, thanks to Joe Manchin and lack of Republican support. There was something like a 7 point shift toward Republicans from voters with kids who got, then lost, the expanded credit. Whether that's because they were pissed that Democrats let it lapse, or they were pissed about inflation, was unclear. But from talking with people who got the credit it probably would have offset most of the sting of global inflation in 2022, had the more generous monthly credits continued.
Greenberg's current polls show similar bad news for Biden as every other poll. If the election were held today, Trump would probably win. What Greenberg is great at is defining an economic populist message that Biden and Democrats can fight for. Which, as Greenberg recommends, should start and end with the idea of raising taxes on the rich.
As I've said in other posts, my bet is mostly that Allan Lichtman is right. Having an incumbent running, and avoiding a bitter fight between Harris and progressives and (name a Democratic Governor), probably means that Democrats are better with Biden on top of the ballot. Despite his weaknesses. Lichtman argues that the polls are useless. I mostly agree. But this polling gives Democrats a good populist message to fight for.
I got a good reality check on this from two of my Millennial nephews over Thanksgiving. They both would prefer Biden step aside. Both are great examples of young voters who disapprove of Biden. That said, there is no question that while they disapprove of Biden they will never vote for Trump. One thinks Biden is too liberal, especially on his green energy stuff. The other thinks Biden is not progressive enough. Which again underscores that not having Biden could be a recipe for a big, and unhelpful, Democratic food fight.
I summarized Lichtman's Keys theory to both. Especially the fact that he predicted every race since 1984 accurately, in advance. And that he thinks not having an incumbent and having an internal food fight would hurt Democrats - just like it did in 2016, as he predicted in Fall 2016. I loved my progressive nephew's reaction. "All that makes common sense. Democrats would be better running an incumbent. Just not this incumbent!"
That said, if Biden is the nominee, he'll likely get the votes of many young voters who don't approve of him. If the alternative is Trump. Trump himself just helped matters by promising to resurrect his failed "repeal and replace" Obamacare plan. The ACA is quite popular among Millennials and Gen Z. It is viewed most favorably by voters aged 18-29, and least favorably (but still net favorable) by voters over 65.
Going after Romney for his distaste for "the 47 %" worked for Obama in 2012. Despite an economy that was in worse shape than today. Biden should focus his fire on how Trump's Republicans cut taxes for the Top 10 %. And how they have opposed the things Democrats have done to help middle class and working class families.
Considering the honesty of George Santos, the intelligence of Lauren Boebert, the empathy of Marjorie T. Green, the moral standards of Matt Gaetz, the integrity of Kari Lake, the spine of Kevin McCarthy, and the personality of Trump, how would your nephews square any decision to vote Blue? Or are they unaware of these modern GOP traits?
😉
-
On 10/31/2023 at 8:10 PM, vinapu said:
nothing wrong with that, when we were young we got our political ideas from barbers and taxi drivers.
The fast pace of the information flowing on TikTok and the number of views per post might not be a fair equivalent to Dad's barber shop.
- vinapu, stevenkesslar and unicorn
-
1
-
2
-
48 minutes ago, KeepItReal said:
There is so much noise coming from all across the opinion spectrum, it is hard to draw conclusions, never mind take a position. I can both sympathize and criticise aspects on all sides - and there are many sides with many stakeholders. It is the proverbial "barrel of fish hooks". Approach with caution. ⚠️
That's a good point, especially in these modern times when so many are gathering their political ideas from TikTok.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 10/14/2023 at 1:32 PM, JKane said:Torn on this, Israel was going ever more to the right, more settlers, more oppression, no sign it might ever get better, I can understand seeing no other option than something violent. If this topples Netanyahu maybe it did accomplish something...?
But the atrocities committed by Hamas will have the effect of making everything so very much worse for Palestinians. And Hamas doesn't care. In fact their hope is for unchecked atrocities to be returned in kind. Keep the cycle going, more grist for the mill.
The welfare of Palestinians is not a priority for Iran. Iran wants to stir the pot in Gaza and Lebanon. They help keep the cycle going.
Regarding Netanyahu, it seems Israelis blame him. Can anyone be surprised how it looks, that a corrupt leader willing to diminish democracy and enrich himself may have taken his eye off the ball?
- JKane, stevenkesslar, Marc in Calif and 3 others
-
4
-
2
-
The GOP Grifters that get punished are the dumb ones that don't know how to cover their tracks or the ones that piss off the wrong people.
Sara Huckabee for example.
There had to be a more palatable way to fund a gal-pal trip to Paris with Arkansas tax revenue than claiming the $19000 was for a lectern, too easy to disprove.
The trouble with Joe Harding and the GOP is there are so many more grifters queued up to follow with more GOP grift.
Didn't Iowa Repubs actually get rid of their auditor (a Dem) which seems to give their GOP government free reign with state funds?
-
A lot of people are saying it......Biden doesn't have the mental faculties that Trump has.
- stevenkesslar and alvnv
-
2
-
-
On 8/13/2023 at 1:33 PM, stevenkesslar said:
This thread is just about six months old. It's interesting that the indictments started with the weakest one and have now, in effect, saved the best for last.
The Jan. 6th indictment is about a complicated conspiracy centered on Trump. But the picture most Americans have in their mind is MAGA supporters jubilantly and patriotically breaking the skulls and bones of police defending democracy. It's in large part about the ugliness, lies, and divisiveness of many of Trump's MAGA followers.
This next one is all about Trump, Trump, and Trump. Donald Trump's lies. Donald Trump's corruption. Donald Trump's loathing of democracy.
You can hate a conservative Republican Governor and a conservative Republican Secretary of State for defending democracy. And some MAGA extremists will. Raffensberger and his family will probably get more death threats. But most Americans will hear the clear smoking gun, the clear lies, and the clear contempt for democracy. Play the tape every day between now and Election Day. And, yes, do the Divine Miss Graham's hair up so she looks pretty when she defends her actions. If that's possible. 😯
I know this is a thread on Trump's indictments. But I'm glad Democrats won't be talking about that. They'll be talking about this instead.
Democrats’ climate law set off a wave of energy projects in GOP districts. A backlash followed.
While Trump is talking about stealing votes in Georgia and how he really, truly, awfully really, definitely, for sure thought he won the 2020 election, let Democrats debate how many jobs they created in red states. Did I mention unemployment is at a 50 year low? Did I mention how the "misery index" is lower than when Biden beat Trump? Let's talk about that while Trump defends his sorry lying corrupt ass.
That article is actually a very nice summary of the complex political dynamics. Money flowing into deindustrialized and rural areas. Republicans who hate the law but love the global investment in America and US factory jobs it's creating. Michigan residents arguing that, uh, what's good for Ford Motor and Michigan factory jobs is good for the Communist Party of China. That's at least an honest debate.
Democrats crushed it in Michigan last year on a platform of making government work for people and defending our rights. This will help Biden win Michigan in 2024, fair and square.
Tis true. Though the context has evolved, the original post was a worthy question and remains an important topic that's been continually debated in the media.
IMO, one applicable argument across all the indictments since @Luckys post is the scenario that
when the justice system ignores criminal activity because the President was involved
it invites the same criminal activity or worse under future election cycles and/or future administrations.
I agree, (probably because I've read your posts), that Democrats need to talk about other things such as the economy, jobs, energy projects, other infrastructure projects and so on. And it seems Biden is doing that.
But I expect the Fulton County indictments will bring a final blow, that will get discussed a lot, especially how Trump's crimes affected people like Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. Their case is going to look undeniably bad for Trump.
From how I understand the law in Georgia, people are going to serve time in jail if they don't flip on Trump.
Back before any of the indictments, some of the talking heads speculated that Fulton County is where Trump will fall. Of course not everyone agrees and maybe I'm swept up in the drama, but to me it seems that the Trump team knows from Fulton County, if they don't win in 2024, he's fucked.
.
- alvnv, Lucky and stevenkesslar
-
2
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:
In addition to hearing about Trump's soon to be four indictments every day between now and next November, I want to hear about Corrupt Clarence every single day, too.
Dems revive calls for Clarence Thomas resignation after new report
I figure Corrupt Clarence is worth two Special Counsels and one high tech impeachment.
One Special Prosecutor for Corrupt Clarence, and one for his democracy loathing wife. Since they share far right extremist views, I'd be okay with them sharing one Special Counsel, I guess. But the impeachment belongs to Corrupt Clarence alone.
Meanwhile, the kingpin of the Biden Crime Family, Joe, is known for having dinner at Cafe Milano, shaking hands, writing nice one sentence notes, and even truly evil shit like talking on speakerphone. Still no evidence of a $5 million bribe, though. Or any favors that impacted any actual policy.
The Republicans will clearly be focused on Hunter until Election Day. Even though they have no trust for Trump-appointed Weiss. Who we were told in 2018 shared Trump's "vision for Making America Safe Again." What is it with these Trump Judases like Weiss, Pence, and Christie? Can't we trust anyone anymore?
I'm fine with picking on Hunter. He deserves it for being an influence peddling shit. But Corrupt Clarence, who actually can and does influence government policy, deserves it even more. (I'm of course leaving out Billion Dollar Boy Wonder Jared and China Money Whore Ivanka, since their corruption at least can no longer influence US foreign or domestic policy.)
Thomas has highest unfavorability on Supreme Court: Poll
All three Democrats have net favorable ratings, topped by Sotomayer with +14 net favorable. Thomas comes in last, even behind Kavanaughty, at -11 negative. Only good news in that for Corrupt Clarence is that Trump is even less popular. And even more corrupt.
It's time for a high tech impeachment of a corrupt extremist judge who is wildly unpopular because he is a national disgrace.
Earlier this year (May 2023) Lindsey Graham claimed the focus on Clarence Thomas is an unethical initiative by the Dems to delegitimize a conservative court. But by now isn't it clear Uncle Thomas is largely responsible for the fall in the Court's reputation?
I'm not waiting for LindseyBelle to chime in again anytime soon, at least not until he learns his fate in Fulton County, whether he is indicted or is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Grand Jury election fraud case.
Since that news may come soon (this week?) ol' Lindsey will need to check his hair and makeup for another turn on Fox, for more spin.
Frankly, I'm not as focused on Clarence and Lindsey though.
Rather, I'm excited to see The Donald have his mug shot and fingerprints taken before appearing in court, in Fulton County
- Mavica, stevenkesslar and alvnv
-
3
This is scary
in Politics
Posted
IMO, BN is a greedy thug, just like Trump and Putin.