Members Suckrates Posted July 5 Members Posted July 5 1 hour ago, bucknaway said: 1a5a75018e1a98d8630adb0c2492cfbf.mp4 Ho-HUM, so says the right wing Propagandarists, who by the way LIE about EVERYTHING. LIARS in glass houses SHOULDN'T throw stones". STAGED EVENTS ? My dear, Trump has been pulling that stunt for DECADES ! Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 8 Members Posted July 8 I am a Lifelong Democrat, but honestly, I am starting to hate the party...... With all the Trump corruption and shenanigans going on that they claim they are "on top of"..... they are way too busy HATING on Mamdani, a Dem whose popularity is soaring, and The Establishment Dems dont know what to do with that as THEIR own popularity sinks..... Mamdani is out in the streets talking to people at their level, he's friendly and charismatic and CONNECTS, while mainstream Dems lately REPEL..... Dems, ditch the "robotic" Jeffries, and get someone more in the "Mamdani wheelhouse" if you have ANY hopes of winning anything come 2026 ? DEMS........ stevenkesslar 1 Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 8 Members Posted July 8 33 minutes ago, Suckrates said: Dems, ditch the "robotic" Jeffries, and get someone more in the "Mamdani wheelhouse" Good luck with that, Sis. I read some anecdote about how Jeffries had some meeting with rich Silicon Valley donors. He basically was inquiring about how we can kiss and make up. So he definitely does not speak for the Mamdani generation, in New York or anywhere. It's unfair. But I'll just say he speaks for the donor class. As does Schumer. Any idea that either of those guys were going to lead us to salvation was always a non-starter. We know that when Reagan was King Democrats spent 12 years figuring out, "Who's next?" It took an enterprising and slick Guv from Arkansas to begin to solve the problem. And he got his ass kicked as too liberal in 1994. But Reagan won in two landslides, pulled off the rare trick of handing power to HW for a third Reagan term, and did genuinely popular stuff. Trump won 49.8 % of the vote in a close election in which Democrats picked up one House seat. He just got a wildly unpopular bill barely passed that will piss off and hurt many of his own voters. So I think Democrats have way better prospects now. I did post that back in 2017, arguing that what Democrats needed was someone in the crowd to show up and lead. I think the same is true today. We know in 2020 we got Biden. It is all woulda coulda shoulda. To me, it was mainly the global inflation, stupid. But I think it could have worked if Biden really did have a strategy to be a transitional figure. it was definitely vain and a fatal error on Biden's part to think history had set him up as the perpetual Trump slayer, in a wheelchair. And maybe it was vain of Democrats in general to think it could work that way. Although, thanks to Biden, we never really got a choice. Like I said above, Reagan in effect pulled off anointing his successor in 1988. But even Clinton could not do it, in 2000 or 2016. One of the few things I genuinely admire about Trump is he did do this in the Republican Party. He showed up and led. It is a narrow and negative divide and conquer strategy that is based on the whims of a narcissistic and cruel guy. So I don't admire THAT. But Trump did something like Clinton did. Only worse. This will have to be fought out, no matter how long it takes. Clinton and his wise men are not democratic socialists. But I agree with Doug Sosnik, one of the Clinton era wise guys. He says whatever Democrats do will have to lean into this Bernie economic populism stuff. As you said, we are seeing that play out in NYC. Meanwhile, we have Ryan and Emma to be pretty, and entertain us. And Dancing With The Stars! Things could be worse. Quote
Members Pete1111 Posted July 9 Members Posted July 9 6 hours ago, Suckrates said: I am a Lifelong Democrat, but honestly, I am starting to hate the party...... With all the Trump corruption and shenanigans going on that they claim they are "on top of"..... they are way too busy HATING on Mamdani, a Dem whose popularity is soaring, and The Establishment Dems dont know what to do with that as THEIR own popularity sinks..... Mamdani is out in the streets talking to people at their level, he's friendly and charismatic and CONNECTS, while mainstream Dems lately REPEL..... Dems, ditch the "robotic" Jeffries, and get someone more in the "Mamdani wheelhouse" if you have ANY hopes of winning anything come 2026 ? DEMS........ In similar fashion, a lot of libs hated on Buttigieg who kicked Biden's ass in Iowa and narrowly beat Sanders. Berniecrats, The Young Turks, and Lawrence O'Donnell shit on Pete any chance they could. Yeah I have to wonder if the Dems live with their heads up their ass. Fuck all if they can't have it their way. Let Trump win. Waaaaaah. Stacy Abrams led an initiative in Georgia that successfully registered enough voters to turn Georgia Blue for Biden and the Senate. Did the Dems throw Abrams a parade? Did they give her a role in the Biden administration? Did the try to repeat her success by implementing her model in other battleground states? No, they did not. Is it important to hold their feet to the fire and ask why? David Hogg tried to raise awareness that some Democrats are "asleep at the wheel" and need to go. That didn't last long. The status quo convinced Hogg to hit the road. The Latino vote was surprisingly strong for Trump. Are the Dems finding TikTok influencers fluent in Spanish that reach tens of millions of subscribers? Do they have any Latino strategy at all? Any social media strategy? The Dems may try to take the safe, centrist way out, but more and more they just seem uninspired and dull. Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 18 Members Posted July 18 Dems are once again making a BIG mistake, running after the HOTTEST and newest Trump story, while ignoring everything else. Dems always tend to put ALL their "eggs" in one basket, and cannot seem to handle 2 Trump crisis's at the same time. FORGET: The deranged and damaging BBB The Texas Flood mishandling The Crazy Tariff flip-flops Putins betrayal and the ongoing War with Ukraine The Gaza Genocide The lingering Iran question of "Obliteration" Musk getting 200 million govt contracts for AI from Pentagon after criticizing Trump ! Dems seem to have tossed ALL the other Trump issues aside, and have been seduced by the latest Epstein episode, which they believe and HOPE will finally weaken the DICTATOR..... Wrong Move Dems...NEVER look away from any Trump crisis. Quote
Moses Posted July 18 Posted July 18 2 hours ago, Suckrates said: Dems seem to have tossed ALL the other Trump issues aside, and have been seduced by the latest Epstein episode, which they believe and HOPE will finally weaken the DICTATOR..... Wrong Move Dems...NEVER look away from any Trump crisis. That is stupid. I means whole Dem strategy is stupid. What does Trump? He speaks about himself. And Dems speak about... Trump. So, everywhere is "Trump... Trump... Trump". Should be everywhere "Trump... Dems... Dems... Trump... Dems... Dems...". Instead of advertising Trump Dems should talk about their strong points and advertise themself. One of main PR rules is "It doesn't matter what they say about you, the main thing is that they talk about you! The details will be forgotten, the name will be remembered." The Democrats have made this mistake before. I predicted their defeat last summer when they had exactly the same strategy, and then they failed to show their advantages and instead advertised Trump. Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 18 Members Posted July 18 16 minutes ago, Moses said: That is stupid. I means whole Dem strategy is stupid. What does Trump? He speaks about himself. And Dems speak about... Trump. So, everywhere is "Trump... Trump... Trump". Should be everywhere "Trump... Dems... Dems... Trump... Dems... Dems...". Instead of advertising Trump Dems should talk about their strong points and advertise themself. One of main PR rules is "It doesn't matter what they say about you, the main thing is that they talk about you! The details will be forgotten, the name will be remembered." The Democrats have made this mistake before. I predicted their defeat last summer when they had exactly the same strategy, and then they failed to show their advantages and instead advertised Trump. Perhaps we agree here, but I strongly suggest the Dems implement a BALANCE, they can point out Trump trangressions BUT they MUST focus on what THEY themselves are offering America. At this point in time Americans dont feel connected to the Dems, and no connection equals NO VOTE...... Certainly they cant forget about Trump, especially when Trump is working so hard to keep himself front and center in the media.... But it CANT be the only thing they talk about, since THAT would suggest THEY themselves have NOTHING to offer.... Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 18 Members Posted July 18 4 hours ago, Suckrates said: Perhaps we agree here, but I strongly suggest the Dems implement a BALANCE, they can point out Trump trangressions BUT they MUST focus on what THEY themselves are offering America. At this point in time Americans dont feel connected to the Dems, and no connection equals NO VOTE...... Certainly they cant forget about Trump, especially when Trump is working so hard to keep himself front and center in the media.... But it CANT be the only thing they talk about, since THAT would suggest THEY themselves have NOTHING to offer.... Again, hate to be a broken record. AMLO won in a sorta landslide in 2018 because he had a vision that people were attracted to. But also Nieto proved that corporate mainstream governance, Mexico's trickle down, was not working. Sheinbaum won in a true landslide in 2024 because MORENA actually delivered results. Despite the same inflation as in the US. The three-way battle for the Democratic Party As much as something this complex and unpredictable can be summarized in one essay, that article does a really good job. And the question is not which of the three wings are correct. They all are. The question is whether they can form a coalition. And then, if elected, whether they can deliver. I don't blame people who feel Biden did not deliver. You can blame it on all sorts of things, starting with global inflation. But it still is what it is. This is the job of a leader. Someone running for President is going to have to pull it together. So as the article says Democrats will have to grumble until 2028. But hopefully by then a lot of people will be hungry to unify and win. Trump had to do the same thing. Build a coalition. And he barely succeeded, twice. The two obvious wings of the GOP are the old Chamber of Commerce wing, which is alive and well and loving its tax cuts and special interest laws. And the working class/trucker driver/MAGA wing. I would not call low-income people a part of the GOP coalition. But Trump did win the votes of people who make under $50,000 in 2024. Which is a huge indictment of Democratic failures. And an explanation for Mamdani. So if there is a third wing of the GOP coalition it is the "high prices" wing. Which already doesn't like what Trump is doing. Electric bills are up 9 % YTD. Just wait till the Medicaid and food debate gets going. I love this abundance thing. It focuses directly on stuff people want. Abundant housing. Abundant energy. Abundant child care. Better that than abundant democracy, I think. Both Ezra Klein lefties and Mandani progressives want the same thing. Abundant stuff. Affordable stuff. It presents Democrats with at least two huge challenges. The rich and corporations will have to pay. Which is something Biden could not deliver. And Democrats will have to govern well. In Chicago the mayor's approval ratings got as low as a single digit in one poll. Meaning a lot of the Black base that elected him are not happy with how he is doing. The best thing that could happen is Mamdani wins and proves progressives can govern. Which is, again, exactly what AMLO did in Mexico City. And then the nation! I'm not suggesting Mandani should run for President, even if he wins and is wildly successful. I think Bernie proved that his brand of democratic socialism is simply a bridge too far. Including for the working class. We have a long time to figure this out. There are a few threads emerging that excite me. Just get old fucks out of the way. Millennials are being awful polite not to say it that bluntly. And I adore Nancy Pelosi. I even think Chuck Schumer is underestimated as a clever political survivor. But they excite no one these days. And Trump is the same worthless old disgusting piece of shit he has always been. Just older. So some burst of youthful energy will happen. We're seeing the previews right now in NYC. And the other thing is this: JUST BUILD SHIT. Just shut the fuck up and build shit. Build affordable shit. Just shut the fuck up. Really. Environmental blah blah blah just shut the fuck up and build shit. I mean, it really is easier to build homes than bombers, or AI, or nuclear power plants, or a new electric grid. It is not rocket science. So just shut the fuck and build shit. Affordable shit. That is what Zoomers want. And Trump, the faux real estate POTUS, ain't gonna do shit about it. Quote
Moses Posted July 18 Posted July 18 1 hour ago, stevenkesslar said: I'm not suggesting Mandani should run for President, even if he wins and is wildly successful. If he will win, US will lost last support in Global South - India. 1 hour ago, stevenkesslar said: And I adore Nancy Pelosi. Grandma is the main reason of raising tensions btw China and US - her last days visit to Taiwan made everything worse. Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 18 Members Posted July 18 1 hour ago, Moses said: Grandma is the main reason of raising tensions btw China and US - her last days visit to Taiwan made everything worse. Grandma is the reason we should nuke Master Xi if he invades Taiwan. Then again, we should have nuked Moscow when Putin started his genocide. Instead, Trump is letting Putin manipulate the hell out of him. I say let's nuke Master Xi and his pit bull, Putin. After all, as you keep saying, the US loves to nuke people every century or so. 😉 Putin, he's just a garden variety genocide type of guy. 😨 Gotta admit, though. We are giving Putin a run for his money and blood in Gaza. Although in fairness the US is just footing the bill for the Genocide Jew. And we're not killing our own people, like Putin is. Quote
Moses Posted July 19 Posted July 19 6 hours ago, stevenkesslar said: Grandma is the reason we should nuke Yeah. That's real face of "democracy" - NUKE... You already are the only nation in world used nuclear bombs on civilians... Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 Mamdani finally meets Jeffries — and comes up short Their ‘constructive, candid and community-centered’ conversation did not result in an endorsement for mayor. Quote But Mamdani is the heavy favorite to become the next mayor of New York City. And even the candidate’s fiercest critics from within the party have acknowledged that his platform to create a more affordable New York City is a winning message for them all. Democrats lost their chance at the House majority in 2024 when Republicans were able to better convince voters that they’re the party focused on cost of living and quality of life. Hakeem Jeffries is a loser. He should resign. He is not change. He is blocking change. On his first round as House Speaker, he lost. So he is, by definition, a loser. Losers lose, and Hakeem lost. So what the fuck does he know? Resign, loser. You are behind the curve and we don't need you. Take your big money donors and go away. Nancy Pelosi is many things. I will name three. Back in the day, she was a hero to the Gay community on AIDS. She is a famed fundraiser who has gotten endless numbers of Democrats elected. And she was arguably the best House Speaker ever. Democrats can thank her as much as Obama for Obamacare and a whole bunch of other stuff. But her time has passed. And Hakeem is basically a weaker version of her, with a Black face rather than a skirt. And so far, all he is is a loser. Everything I read about Hakeem is he wants to go kiss ass and make up with Silicon Valley donors and big money. He is the face of a party that does not know what they stand for. Other than to convince people like me to give them money to stand for nothing and fight for nothing. And lose. Go away, Hakeem. YOU ARE A LOSER. Do you get the message, loser? I'm not a huge fan of Mamdani. But I think I understand what he stands for. And the Democratic Party needs it if we want to have any hope of winning. Millennials in particular - the same people that stood for Obama, and were the energy behind Bernie - want real change. And if it sounds good enough and real enough, a lot of the Zoomer men who voted for Trump and aren't thrilled with what they got may vote Democratic. We tried a version of this in Chicago. And so far no one thinks Mayor Johnson is a success. His poll ratings are dismal. If Mamdani wins we get another try in New York, around a clear and riveting populist agenda. There is a whole crew of seasoned progressives from the DeBlasio days that have actual experience running things that can and probably will step in if Mandani wins. I'm not convinced it will work. But it is a big piece of what my party needs if it wants to have a future. So I hope he wins, and I hope he governs well. The fact that Hakeem won't get behind this sends me a clear message. I won't give a penny to Hakeem or his party. I donate to lots of Democrats, and I will keep doing it. But I hope Hakeem himself fails and quits. He is a loser who loses, and stands for nothing. Go away, Hakeem. We don't need you. Loser! Bill Clinton is not a loser. Nor would I call him a progressive. But he is a great politician who can read the room better than most. So he got right behind Mamdani. One of his old hack political advisers, Doug Sosnik, is one of the guys I like to listen to. He is not a progressive, either. But he is saying the same thing. The economic populism Bernie fought hard for in 2016 and 2020, which was anchored in Millennials, has to be a big part of the mix if Democrats actually want to win and deliver change. I think Clinton and Sosnik are winners who win. Because they know what effective politics is. Jeffries is pissing on his own future. He is weak, and stands for nothing. Nancy Pelosi was always going to be a hard act to follow. But this guy is a loser. He should go away. Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 7 hours ago, Moses said: Yeah. That's real face of "democracy" - NUKE... You already are the only nation in world used nuclear bombs on civilians... It's so funny that you of all people want to live in 1945. I know Russia is behind the times. But, really? Can't we try to live in the 21st Century? These days, there is one bad ass who keeps threatening to nuke a neighbor. And that is your genocidal monster, Putin. You might want to update him on your feelings about nukes. Then again, he might kill you. Be careful. By coincidence, there was just this long article in Politico about an oral history of the first testing of a nuke in July 1945. It is an interesting read. Here is the line that stood out the most to me: Quote Norris Bradbury, physicist, Los Alamos Lab: Some people claim to have wondered at the time about the future of mankind. I didn’t. We were at war, and the damned thing worked. My Dad, who was on a ship in the Pacific in WWII, felt that way. The damn thing worked. It meant he didn't have to be slaughtered in a land invasion of Japan. Being slaughtered in a land invasion. Let's see. Is there anything like that happening in the world today? Surely you can relate. Putin has to pay the families of the poor and ethnic minorities and Russian criminals to go be slaughtered in Ukraine. What gives you standing to talk about anything? Remember that Japan provoked the US, just like Putin provoked Ukraine and the West. You can say whatever you want about NATO and Gorbachev and promises made. But Putin invaded Ukraine and started a genocide. Even Putin's favorite fool, Donald Trump, seems to have now accepted that fact. So he is incompetently trying to lure Putin into some deal that Putin clearly won't make. Putin definitely has won a big battle with Trump's victory. So congratulations to you. And enjoy it while it lasts. But I still think Russia is fucked. You now have a shitty economy with inflation and debt that depends on a war you can't win. One reason Putin wants to keep the war going is his economy now depends on it. And most of the rest of the world hates you. Good luck with that. As much as I despise him, I do kind of feel sorry for Trump. We have two actively genocidal assholes in the world today. Putin, and Netanyahu. And a fool named Trump who thinks he can win a Nobel by making peace with both. Meanwhile, the genocides continue. The US and Israel is paying for one, and Putin is paying for another. So it is just bad news. And not a good time for people who actually want peace. Too bad for the rest of the world. Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 At the VERY beginning, when Pelosi introduced him, I WAS a fan of Hakeem..... As time went by and I listened to his robotic speak and stale ideas, less and less so.... And now I am reviled EVERY time I hear him speak. Even the sight of him rub me in a very wrong way.. That said, I liked Mamdani from the start, I connected with his friendly, approachable manner. In my mind, I can hear him whisper ("get on your knees and blow me, boy"). However, I do also recognize some of his proposals are far fetched and unattainable, but at least he is thinking of ways TO HELP PEOPLE...... I like that. And it is way too soon for me to deduce that HE is a LIAR and CON like Adams...... So, so far I am a Mamdani girl..... And whiule the Dems think they have been given a gift with the Epstein crisis, they NEVER know what to do with these gifts when they get them. Dems are now all in on Epstein, but what about ALL the other Trump crisis's ?????? They did a 100% pivot and dropped all the other Trump shit, which for "normal" people are more important than the Epstein saga. Poor Dems, THEY WILL NEVER LEARN. stevenkesslar 1 Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 10 minutes ago, Suckrates said: In my mind, I can hear him whisper ("get on your knees and blow me, boy"). Hate to break the bad news, Sis. But I wouldn't get your hopes up. He might let you suck on a nipple, at least. Something is better than nothing. Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 14 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said: Hate to break the bad news, Sis. But I wouldn't get your hopes up. He might let you suck on a nipple, at least. Something is better than nothing. Au contraire...... "We're ALL a little GAY", and he IS adorable ! Get him to a gym and he will become a Gay ICON... stevenkesslar 1 Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 34 minutes ago, Suckrates said: Poor Dems, THEY WILL NEVER LEARN. Granted, I am OLD. As you so kindly noted in another post, my Beloved Sister In Cock. 😍 True story. Once, when I was young, someone teased me by putting this Chinese fortune on my work mailbox: "In youth ans beauty, wisdom is rare." I'm hoping I at least can count on the wisdom part now. Quote “I do believe that there are issues that populists on the right and left can collaborate on,” [California Democratic House member Ro] Khanna said in an interview. “In this case, it’s about going after the corruption in our government. Rich and powerful men shouldn’t have impunity from accountability. And that’s something that both people on the left and right are sick of.” True! This is the part of it that makes sense to me. Both for deeply principled progressives, and for loose cannons like Theo Von. I do believe in the "someone in the crowd" theory of politics. Who would have guessed Clinton in 1992, or Obama in 2008, or Trump in 2016 and then again in 2024? Politics is weird. Leaders emerge. That said, the problem with my theory is that it's more complicated than Emma Stone looking pretty. They have to fight like hell to win and lead. Clinton, Obama, and Trump all know that very well. Khanna is one of those guys fighting like hell. So when I think of who could emerge in 2028, he is one of the people on my short list. That said, the whole point is I don't think we know. Mamdani himself is proof that lightning sometimes just has to strike. The problem with Khanna is that he is a California liberal. Didn't we just have one of that ilk lose? I also think he is the kind of wonky candidate, like Elizabeth Warren, who wonks like me love. They contribute to the debate. But they never win the grand prize. Working class people like people who sound working class. Hence Ruben Gallego, who says what every Mexican American man wants is a big ass truck and cheap gas to fill it with. That's the ticket! That said, who knows? What is interesting is that Khanna comes from one of the richest and most ethnically diverse House districts in America. You can stop there and say, THAT is the future America I want. Rich, forward looking, interesting, a global collection of winners who work hard and win. And he'll look rich people in Silicon Valley in the face and say put your money where your mouth is. You should pay more taxes. While Hakeem just goes and kisses their asses. Quote
Members stevenkesslar Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 42 minutes ago, Suckrates said: Au contraire...... "We're ALL a little GAY", and he IS adorable ! Get him to a gym and he will become a Gay ICON... Be careful what you ask for, sweetie. Do you really want to be the next Beau Breedlove? And yes. It does sound like some name out of a Gay porn movie. But truth actually is stranger than fiction. Beau Breedlove tells of his romance as a 17-year-old with Sam Adams Adams was Portland's first Gay mayor. I think at the time Portland was the largest city to elect a Gay mayor. Sam left office kind of disgraced, because of the above. He tried to make a political comeback in 2020, and lost a City Council race. He tried again in 2024, and lost a race for a seat on the County Commission. It gets sadder. His partner, Peter Zuckerman, led the campaign to decriminalize drugs in Oregon. It won in 2020, the heyday of woke, by 59 % of the vote. After it passed, fentanyl use exploded. All kinds of promises were made about how progressive government would spend money on effective drug treatment to get to the root of the problem. Even defenders of the law agreed that did not happen as planned. The law was repealed in 2024. Measure 110 rollback passes House: Oregonians ‘ready for this misguided experiment to be over’ Quote In unusually emotional proceedings, the Oregon House on Thursday voted to make minor drug possession a misdemeanor crime, bringing the state a step closer to ending its pioneering and fraught experiment with decriminalization. If I had to name one woke phrase that hurt Democrats badly, it would be "Defund The Police." But this would be a close second. It contributed to the narrative that progressives can't govern. They are all talk and no action. Except to kiss Beau Breedlove, maybe. Sam has nice nipples, though. 🙄 I saw him partly naked a few times, since we went to the same gym and he would hang out in the sauna. And I did have a professional liaison with him, of sorts. Before he was elected Mayor, he was the former Mayor's Chief of Staff while I ran a campaign to impose a progressive tax to fund schools on the largest corporations in Portland. That won, and was wildly popular. This shit is not rocket science. The woman who was the County chair at the time actually was a former socialist recruited to run for office by a friend of mine. She told me as much as she liked the idea of a progressive tax on big business, she could not support it because they would run her out of office. We did it, anyways. She supported it, anyways. We won. Corporate Portland hated it and did target her. She won re-election handily because she fought for something. So it pisses me off when these people will not stand and fight. Because my own personal experience is that when Democrats stood and fought, we won. Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 1 hour ago, stevenkesslar said: Be careful what you ask for, sweetie. Do you really want to be the next Beau Breedlove? And yes. It does sound like some name out of a Gay porn movie. But truth actually is stranger than fiction. Beau Breedlove tells of his romance as a 17-year-old with Sam Adams Adams was Portland's first Gay mayor. I think at the time Portland was the largest city to elect a Gay mayor. Sam left office kind of disgraced, because of the above. He tried to make a political comeback in 2020, and lost a City Council race. He tried again in 2024, and lost a race for a seat on the County Commission. It gets sadder. His partner, Peter Zuckerman, led the campaign to decriminalize drugs in Oregon. It won in 2020, the heyday of woke, by 59 % of the vote. After it passed, fentanyl use exploded. All kinds of promises were made about how progressive government would spend money on effective drug treatment to get to the root of the problem. Even defenders of the law agreed that did not happen as planned. The law was repealed in 2024. Measure 110 rollback passes House: Oregonians ‘ready for this misguided experiment to be over’ If I had to name one woke phrase that hurt Democrats badly, it would be "Defund The Police." But this would be a close second. It contributed to the narrative that progressives can't govern. They are all talk and no action. Except to kiss Beau Breedlove, maybe. Sam has nice nipples, though. 🙄 I saw him partly naked a few times, since we went to the same gym and he would hang out in the sauna. And I did have a professional liaison with him, of sorts. Before he was elected Mayor, he was the former Mayor's Chief of Staff while I ran a campaign to impose a progressive tax to fund schools on the largest corporations in Portland. That won, and was wildly popular. This shit is not rocket science. The woman who was the County chair at the time actually was a former socialist recruited to run for office by a friend of mine. She told me as much as she liked the idea of a progressive tax on big business, she could not support it because they would run her out of office. We did it, anyways. She supported it, anyways. We won. Corporate Portland hated it and did target her. She won re-election handily because she fought for something. So it pisses me off when these people will not stand and fight. Because my own personal experience is that when Democrats stood and fought, we won. This story had the same effect on me that Trumps story about his uncle John the professor teaching the UNIBOMBER had, but I have to admit I did doze off a few times during your long but interesting tale..... And NO I am not cut out to be a Beau Breedlove, just a simple gal with kneepads thats loves giving "community service" But I am starting to worry about YOU sis...... This little departure reminded me of Trumps "WEAVE".... and I would hate to learn that any of Trumps behavior has rubbed off on my dear sissy...... But back to Mayors.... I DESPISE Adams, recoil at Cuomo now, so where does that leave me... I dont see many RED flags for Mamdani YET.......all the flags are sorta "pinkish"..... So I will wait it out and see, much like I always do, but I will confess I DID vote for Mamy in the Primes..... Dont HATE me ! Quote
Members Suckrates Posted July 19 Members Posted July 19 1 hour ago, stevenkesslar said: Granted, I am OLD. As you so kindly noted in another post, my Beloved Sister In Cock. 😍 True story. Once, when I was young, someone teased me by putting this Chinese fortune on my work mailbox: "In youth ans beauty, wisdom is rare." I'm hoping I at least can count on the wisdom part now. True! This is the part of it that makes sense to me. Both for deeply principled progressives, and for loose cannons like Theo Von. I do believe in the "someone in the crowd" theory of politics. Who would have guessed Clinton in 1992, or Obama in 2008, or Trump in 2016 and then again in 2024? Politics is weird. Leaders emerge. That said, the problem with my theory is that it's more complicated than Emma Stone looking pretty. They have to fight like hell to win and lead. Clinton, Obama, and Trump all know that very well. Khanna is one of those guys fighting like hell. So when I think of who could emerge in 2028, he is one of the people on my short list. That said, the whole point is I don't think we know. Mamdani himself is proof that lightning sometimes just has to strike. The problem with Khanna is that he is a California liberal. Didn't we just have one of that ilk lose? I also think he is the kind of wonky candidate, like Elizabeth Warren, who wonks like me love. They contribute to the debate. But they never win the grand prize. Working class people like people who sound working class. Hence Ruben Gallego, who says what every Mexican American man wants is a big ass truck and cheap gas to fill it with. That's the ticket! That said, who knows? What is interesting is that Khanna comes from one of the richest and most ethnically diverse House districts in America. You can stop there and say, THAT is the future America I want. Rich, forward looking, interesting, a global collection of winners who work hard and win. And he'll look rich people in Silicon Valley in the face and say put your money where your mouth is. You should pay more taxes. While Hakeem just goes and kisses their asses. Ro Khanna is a bit too "milquetoast" for today's politics.....He is TOO calming, does give off an Obama vibe, but our politics have far progressed to a point where a more commanding "personality" is needed. Khanna gets lost in the crowd. Quote
