It’s an old and honourable all-purpose phrase to describe this American variety of 27%-er sucker:
The fact that many of them are victims of the Strict Father Model doesn’t excuse the damage they’ve knowingly done. Harshness is what they deserve.
I’d say I’m done making excuses for enablers of right-wing populism, but I never did that in the first place. I’ve said it before: no quarter for fascists, no excuses for those who wittingly or unwittingly vote for, support, or enable them.
And with an asteroid named after her because she came in second in the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair. She’s smarter and better educated than practically all of her critics. She’s still not a doctor though, or any kind of advanced degree holder.
I never said there was anything wrong with being a bartender, just noting the weird flip-flop from “hurr durr she’s a bartender” to “Doctor Ocasio-Cortez”.
I’m trying to find a way to talk about them without referring to them as “deplorables” (even though that’s a completely accurate way of describing most of those nazis.) It’s hard to claim to be their representative in any meaningful way when that’s your choice of language (as Hilary did.)
I’m almost certain that Clinton was cack-handedly using “basket of deplorables” because she’d heard it from one of her internal polling wonks (pollsters, marketers, and economists love their “baskets”). That said, I’m not looking to represent the Know-Nothing 27% who, almost by definition and often quite vehemently, don’t want to be represented by a progressive or liberal and are insulted by the offer.
We have to focus on the other 23% of the electorate who vote GOP. There’s still hope for some of them, and if we peel off even a fifth of them we make our margin.
I like the term idiots.
Moreover, the Democratic Party base in the state is traditionally left-leaning even by Democratic standards. When I caucused there in 1984 the big decision in my caucus was whether to support George McGovern or Jesse Jackson; the conservative candidates like John Glenn and Fritz Hollings had no support at all.
Strange post – If I’m reading it correctly, it says that GOP leaders in Iowa mock and deride AOC and Bernie, YET PARADOXICALLY, AOC and Bernie do well with Democratic audiences. Huh? Moreover, in Iowa, the Democrats are particularly progressive (unlike, say, West Virginia or Pennsylvania).
I think it also helps Warren as well, as she is a more pragmatic social democrat – similar to Bernie in many ways, but she’s the One Who Persisted and actually got things done.
Nah. There’s a much larger electorate that gets missed if you do that.
https://twitter.com/eshalegal/status/1027051317330685952?s=21
https://twitter.com/eshalegal/status/1027053898614431744?s=21
Tweets obviously from a discussion about the Green Party, but the larger point should be clear.
The untapped voting bloc in the USA is non-voters. Most of whom are to the left of both parties, and most of whom are likely to be repulsed by any attempt to appeal to “moderate” Republicans.
So, they’re saying John Snow knew nothing?
We’re doomed, if this is the way we continue as a species.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
