Traitor Watch - The 45 & 47 Thread

[Axaday]

Loading…

www.cnn.com

How perfect is this? If Trump ends the tax credit to buy a EV, it could drive Tesla's competitors out of business and Telsa is making enough profit that they can reduce price a little and mop up the competition. Yay for Democracy! Yay of Capitalism! Once again Competition makes the customer the winner!

 

[Rhinox]

blatant corruption and favor granting. But nothing will be done. Trump lives a consequence free life.

 

[G.B.Blackrock]

Finally, on the election itself, here's where i'm sure I'm going to piss a lot of people off. Kamala never should have been the candidate. It was proven in 2016 that America will vote for the least capable male over the most qualified female. While Clinton had other baggage, so did Biden. But people (especially other women) were willing to vote for Biden. They weren't for Kamala. I'm as progressive as the next person. I believe women to be just as capable as any man, especially that man. But the nation, by and large, isn't.

If the democrats want to win, then we have to put aside nicety. We have to campaign like we've already lost and have nothing to lose. We need a firebrand who will call out this behavior and bullshit instead of giving pithy statements and nonanswers. hug, run Lewis Black. That's the kind of energy needed.

I agreed with the first part of your post, but disagree with these parts. I'm convinced that Kamala's being a woman, despite the very real sexism still present in this country, wasn't much of a factor against her. She lost far more due to the anti-incumbent feelings sweeping the nation (and, frankly, the world). I don't even think another Democrat could have won, because they'd still be tied to Biden's perceived failings (although I will concede that Kamala Harris suffered this more than others might have), but certainly once Biden made the decision to run again (and thus only dropped out late), there was nothing more anyone could have done than what Kamala Harris was able to do.

There isn't a shadow of a doubt in my mind that Kamala Harris got more votes than Biden would have done, had he stayed in.

And you'll never, ever, get me to sign on to being rotten to people, even if they're being rotten to you. We simply must be better than that.

 

[Rhinox]

I agree Kamala performed better than Joe would have. But, and I hate to be this way, but I do believe that her being a woman played a role. We've just been shown that women will vote for a ******* rapist over another woman. The biggest detractor of any woman is another woman. This isn't the first time I've seen this kind of thing and it always astonishes me. I do not understand it, frankly.

As far as the other, I'm over being nice. I'm tired, man. I'm tired of trying to be civil in the face of naked aggression. I'm tired of trying to be nice when the other side literally flies flags that say "hug your feelings". I am tired of the double standard and no one having the stones to call bullshit. Stop letting them get away with it. Stop letting them gaslight. Stop letting them call you names and being a dick and then feeling sorry for them when they get offended that someone hurt their feelings. It is time to be mean. Not rotten. There is a difference. Tell them they're full of jive to their face and call them on it. Not maliciously, but factually. Use the truth and beat them over the head with it. Stop taking their bullshit for an answer.

 

[Pocket]

I for one have never been interested in being nice to Trumptards, but I highly doubt going around picking fights with them would have made Trump lose either. Unless you have a plan to wipe them out, the only worthwhile thing to do is try to avoid them as much as possible.

 

[Axaday]

Just a week or two before Joe stepped down I had a conversation with my wife about how difficult it will be for a woman to win the White House and how probably she wouldn't win the nomination in 2028 (which sounds much more futuristic than it is). Then all the sudden she was the presumptive nominee and I believed it was going to happen.

Now I am sitting here in mid-November and I don't really feel like being a woman hurt her very much, but it did hurt her. What I had been thinking before was that the Republican Party will not nominate a woman for the top spot for some time and though the Democrats do from time to time, the most irritating block is conservative women. In the calculus of an election you'd be hoping to sway some conservative women, hopefully enough to counterbalance the men that you would lose. But it doesn't happen.

Kamala won 54% of the female vote, 44% of men
Biden got 57% of the female vote, 45% of men
Clinton got 54% of the female vote, 41% of men
Obama got 55% and 56% of the female vote, 45% and 49% of men

Obama and Biden both did better with women AND with men. I live in Oklahoma. Talk to conservative women about this and this is what you'll find: They don't see anything of themselves in Kamala and Hillary.

 

[Rhinox]

That is true, the women here in Kansas are much the same. They don't see anything of themselves in either Kamala or Hillary. But there's also a level of vitriol that simply isn't talked about.

 

[Axaday]

Kamala suffered, yes, from an anti-incumbent wave.
She also suffered from the awkwardness of a VP where she could not effectively establish her own identity apart from Biden.

When Biden was being asked to step down there was a period in there where the public thought maybe anyone could be the candidate. Maybe Michelle Obama. Maybe Oprah. Maybe Gavin Newsom. But it was always the truth that it could only Kamala. Anything else would be WAY too much of a hat trick and would have been very disgraceful to and disrespectful of Kamala Harris who was actually elected (though not with this scenario ever in mind) to the job of being ready to replace Biden if needed.

If reality had been different and there really was an open field one of the most important weaknesses that Kamala had would have been allayed by choosing someone who was currently running for the Senate or a Democratic governorship. Remember over the summer when people kept on talking about how Kamala wasn't been specific enough and wasn't sitting for interviews. People talked like she maybe didn't understand the issues or was entitled or something. What was going on was that she had to hit the road immediately and start campaigning, but usually a candidate comes to the primary with their platform in hand and hones it a bit against their competitors and someone gets to the national convention with a solid book. Kamala is around politics. She understands the issues. She has beliefs about them. But she didn't know what were the most important issues to discuss and she didn't have a holistic coalated set of her firm positions and she didn't have time to do it. Someone who was running for Governor or Senate would already have that and would just broaden out their appearances. They'd already be on message. So at the end of the day she was asking us to vote for (and I did!) my opponent is a criminal and a weirdo, I'll protect your abortion rights (she can't), and the economy isn't as bad as they act like it is (cannot be effectively communicated ever). She needed something else to talk about. She hinted at it. She was a new generation of leadership to face our future challenges. It's a good line, but I don't know what it means other than that she isn't old. I was willing to give her a shot, certainly when she up against THAT guy, but it is easy to see why other people didn't.

 

[Pale Rider]

Hillary and Kamala had the same problem: they're both perceived as coastal elites.

Gavin Newsom will have the same problem if he's the nominee in 2028, which I'm already presuming.

 

[Rhinox]

I need the democrats to understand that the stock market is not the economy.
The millions here at the bottom give less than 2 shits about Wall Street. We care about the price of groceries. Rent and utility costs. All those things that keep going up because, again, billionaires and stock holders are demanding more blood from the stone. And understanding that their financial positions are strengthened by the GOP holding office, they make sure that they tip the scale as best they can.

 

[Axaday]

That is true, the women here in Kansas are much the same. They don't see anything of themselves in either Kamala or Hillary. But there's also a level of vitriol that simply isn't talked about.

And I'm reluctant to talk about it too. I am afraid of talking myself off a cliff.

My mom really liked Laura Bush. My mom is gone, but if you'd asked her 10 years ago if she'd like there to be a female President, she would've said yes. If you had asked her what they'd be like, you would find she was describing Laura Bush. And I am fearful, belaboring the point past there. I don't know Laura Bush. I just have an impression of her public persona. She is sweet and kind and soft-spoken and loves everyone she meets. That's what my mom's public persona was too. It was a li'l different behind closed doors (I love my mom!), but that is what she thought a woman should be like. Well, a woman like that can run the country. There's nothing in that that conflicts with being wise, responsible, tough, and decisive. But I don't think a woman like that can win an election. A MAN like that can't either. Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton got to their level of success in politics by displaying some characteristics and political skill that they have in common with the men who get to that level. Characteristics and skills that absent in me and absent in most men, but are traditionally viewed as masculine. I think my mom feels more betrayed when she sees a woman acting like that than my dad does.

 

[Rhinox]

And I'm reluctant to talk about it too. I am afraid of talking myself off a cliff.

My mom really liked Laura Bush. My mom is gone, but if you'd asked her 10 years ago if she'd like there to be a female President, she would've said yes. If you had asked her what they'd be like, you would find she was describing Laura Bush. And I am fearful, belaboring the point past there. I don't know Laura Bush. I just have an impression of her public persona. She is sweet and kind and soft-spoken and loves everyone she meets. That's what my mom's public persona was too. It was a li'l different behind closed doors (I love my mom!), but that is what she thought a woman should be like. Well, a woman like that can run the country. There's nothing in that that conflicts with being wise, responsible, tough, and decisive. But I don't think a woman like that can win an election. A MAN like that can't either. Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton got to their level of success in politics by displaying some characteristics and political skill that they have in common with the men who get to that level. Characteristics and skills that absent in me and absent in most men, but are traditionally viewed as masculine. I think my mom feels more betrayed when she sees a woman acting like that than my dad does.

You make my point far more eloquently than I could.
Taking my wife as an example. This is before the event of a few weeks ago. She is not the same person anymore. She genuinely hated Hillary, but couldn't articulate why except she pissed her off. Much the same with Kamala, she didn't have a reason she could articulate, just that she hated seeing her out there, how she acted and presented herself. It made her mad.

Look at the female backlash to the Equal Rights Amendment. I think there's far more Phyllis Schlaflys out there than we want to admit.

 

[MrBlud]

Hillary and Kamala had the same problem: they're both perceived as coastal elites.

Gavin Newsom will have the same problem if he's the nominee in 2028, which I'm already presuming.

The Democrats running a white man so out of touch he broke COVID protocols for a party at a fancy restaurant 99% of people couldn’t afford to eat at *would* be the most Democrat thing ever…

 

[Pocket]

I need the democrats to understand that the stock market is not the economy.
The millions here at the bottom give less than 2 shits about Wall Street. We care about the price of groceries. Rent and utility costs. All those things that keep going up because, again, billionaires and stock holders are demanding more blood from the stone. And understanding that their financial positions are strengthened by the GOP holding office, they make sure that they tip the scale as best they can.

Unfortunately they're bought and paid for by Big Business just as much as the Republicans are. To an extent this is because they wouldn't be able to afford to campaign if they weren't. The few people who have a lot of money and genuinely wish to do as much good as possible with it are going to put it towards running charitable foundations, not donate it to politicians. And until such time as a law is passed that puts a hard limit on campaign spending (which will never happen because the only people around to pass such a law are politicians who are bought by big business), I don't see that ever changing. I really don't know how so many countries have managed to avoid this problem.

 

[NovaSaber]

"Coastal elite" is such a bullshit category, considering Trump is more "coastal" than Hillary (she's originally from Chicago and became well-known in Arkansas) and far more "elite(ist)" than Kamala.

But I know the false perception of such a thing exists, and it's just another example of how it is in fact true to say that Democrats lost because people who vote for Republicans are ignorant.

If pointing out and correcting the ignorance of the less-informed voters does not work, then we don't have a world where good, honest people can win.

 

[MrBlud]

Most of them haven’t!

Backlash is widespread against established parties who have done little to meaningfully improve their constituents lives because that would run afoul of rich, entrenched interests.

People are mad at enshittification of *everything* and are voting out parties they hold responsible because almost no one consistently targets the real problem ie the super wealthy.

 

[G.B.Blackrock]

Hillary and Kamala had the same problem: they're both perceived as coastal elites.

Gavin Newsom will have the same problem if he's the nominee in 2028, which I'm already presuming.

No question: Gavin Newsom is utterly reviled by a lot of people (and not just hyper-conservatives). He'd have the lefist base, but he'd have an uphill battle winning over enough of the rest of the nation to be elected.

I don't say it's impossible for 2028, but if he ran this year (especially if hampered by the timeline set by Biden's withdrawal), I'm confident he'd have lost, too.

 

[Axaday]

Would it have been any better if Biden had resigned and Kamala had been sworn in as the 47th President?

 

[CoffeeHorse]

I doubt it. There's not much she could have done as President with congress being busy with their own campaigns. It wouldn't have been her fault, but it wouldn't have helped.

 

[NovaSaber]

The word of the year next year is going to be "kakistocracy".

RFK Jr wants to promote raw milk as HHS secretary – experts say it’s dangerous

RFK Jr. promises to wage a ‘war on public health’ beginning with the legalization of raw milk consumption

www.independent.co.uk

Days before the presidential election, Kennedy shared his wish list for the FDA, which included ivermectin, stem cell therapy and raw milk.

In recent months, public figures from Marjorie Taylor Greene to “trad wife” influencer Hannah Neeleman, have joined the raw milk endorsement, leaving government officials alarmed. Experts urge consumers to avoid unpasteurized dairy products, particularly in light of the recent discovery of the first strain of bird flu (H5N1) infecting cows in multiple states like Texas.

This year, research found extraordinarily high concentrations of the H5N1 virus in the udders of infected cows, heightening concerns that unpasteurized milk could lead to human infections. According to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), studies indicated that if the virus is found in milk, the pathogens can be killed if it’s pasteurized.

While pasteurization – introduced by Louis Pasteur more than a century ago – eliminates these pathogens, raw milk sales have risen 65 percent this year, especially in states where its sale is legal.

Loading…

edition.cnn.com

President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team is bypassing traditional FBI background checks for at least some of his Cabinet picks while using private companies to conduct vetting of potential candidates for administration jobs, people close to the transition planning say.

Trump and his allies believe the FBI system is slow and plagued with issues that could stymie the president-elect’s plan to quickly begin the work of implementing his agenda, people briefed on the plans said. Critics say the intrusive background checks sometimes turn up embarrassing information used to inflict political damage.

The discussions come as Trump has floated several controversial choices for high-level positions in the US government – including Matt Gaetz for attorney general and Tulsi Gabbard for director of national intelligence.

Conservative Has Brutal Warning For GOP After Trump Picks 'Vile Sex Pest' Gaetz For AG

With friends like these...

www.comicsands.com

"I realize that we are occasionally given to hyperbole about the untoward nature of politicians, but let me be clear: Matt Gaetz is a sex trafficking drug addicted piece of s**t. He is abhorrent. His eyes are permanently rimmed with the red rings of chemical boosters. In person, he smells like overexposed Axe Body Spray and stale Astroglide."