All Activity

I think that makes my point!

Or edited by AI?

+1

Two of those four issues are the economy: health care for women and rural areas. Immigration is the economy, too. But that is far tricker for Democrats. I don't think health care hurt Democrats in 2020 or 2024. Immigration for sure hurt Democrats in 2024. The poster child for that is Claire McCaskill. But I'll throw in Heidi Heitkamp as well. As recently as 2012 those two could get elected to the US Senate in Missouri and North Dakota. Had those two been Senators rather than Manchin and Sinema, Biden would have barely had the votes. And we could have an expanded child tax credit and see whether my theory about focusing on real and practical economic help would have worked better. To be clear, those child tax credits were not wildly popular among all voters. Meaning mostly among voters who did not get them. In part because there is this whole other issue of "welfare" and creating dependency. But even lots of conservative populists now see this policy, which has strong roots among many Republicans, as a pro-family policy that simply helps kids and helps working class families. Arguably it would be better if we could just restore the millions of factory jobs we lost, mostly under W. But no Democrat or Republican has that magic wand. I will recycle my rant above about Democratic Senators in "red" states, since it is so criitical. I followed the polls closely in 2018. And I was sending money to the Democratic Senators that lost: McCaskill, Heitkamp, Donnelly in Indiana. In Summer 2018 McCaskill was leading in the polls, and health care - for women, for rural areas, for everyone -was a reason why. What changed that is the Kavanaugh thing. What I thought of at the time as The Testicle Vote (aka men) shifted hard and fast against all three of those Democrats in Fall 2018. That turned out to have real consequences for Biden for four years. To be fair, as much as I trash Manchin and Sinema Biden was better off with them than two more Republicans. The problem Democrats face is that I don't think Bernie or AOC or any college-educated socialist can bridge the "culture war" divide. Bernie spent years trying after 2016. He had an army of devoted young people on his side. They hoped by 2020 he could get working class men in places like Michigan and Texas to rally around him. I thought he was particularly good at downplaying culture war issues like reparations. And it was just a bridge too far. In 2020 those people went hard for Biden. I don't think Hillary or Harris could bridge it. Both lost in large part because unlike Bill Clinton, and to a much lesser degree Obama and Biden, they did poorly with the White male Bubba vote that Bill Clinton did well with. But I also don't think Democrats can't win in red states with women. McCaskill and Heitkamp. among others, proved that. I think it does mean Democrats - like those two women - have to focus on the economy and moderate and tone down the culture war issues that keep hurting Democrats. Lots of Gay men despise Bill Clinton because of Gays In The Military. I actually think he was the best Democratic President of my adult lifetime. I put it in the context of history. Arguably, he was Reagan Lite. But he still got his ass kicked in 1994 for being too liberal. Arguably, Clinton's inability to keep his dick in his pants was just bad enough to lose Gore a very tight race in 2000. Although Gore was no gift to campaigning either. My point is, Clinton had huge flaws. But during his 8 years polls show he moved the whole country gradually to the center left, in part by moderating himself. When he left office trust in government was much higher than it was when he arrived. Isn't that what Democrats want? A government that helps, and that people trust? Unlike Clinton, Obama could get a signature health care reform passed. Unlike Clinton or Obama, Biden did not get his ass kicked in 2022 for being too liberal. So I view this as slow progress. Biden governed as the most liberal POTUS since at least LBJ. And he almost got away with it. I will never be sure how I feel about Biden. He was never my first choice. Or second. Or third. But Sanders and Warren could not close the deal. In 2020 Harris didn't even come close. Was the problem for Biden not enough votes? Too much age? Or simply not enough vision? I think all three. He wanted to be FDR. He didn't come close in terms of his legacy. The positive way of saying this is that Democrats did come close. They won in 2020. And they did NOT lose badly in 2024 in an economy ravaged by inflation. In 2028 all of this will likely be working against JD Vance, or whoever Republicans pick. So some Democrat should be able to do that. In theory. I loved Ossoff's speech. I think he uses "corruption" as as an us/them thing. Meaning Trump is part of the Epstein class. At best these rich corrupt fat cats don't give a shit about you, and just want tax cuts while your Medicaid or Medicare or rural hospital suffers. At worst they want to rape your daughter and be above the law. I think that is very effective. Part of the problem is that Ossoff is a liberal college educated policy wonk. So was Bill Clinton. Clinton could hide it by being from Arkansas, speaking like a Bubba, and having a sense Hillary never had of how to avoid becoming a liberal caricature. I think "corruption" gives Ossoff a way to be part of the working class "us". Even though he is, and seems to be, a liberal college educated policy wonk. Ossoff is one of four Democrats I send money to every month (Peltola in Alaska, Talarico in Texas, Brown in Ohio, Ossoff in Georgia. Once Michigan and Iowa and Maine have picked Senate nominees I add them. I assume Cooper will win North Carolina. And if he can't, the other four I just mentioned will likely lose. Hold Georgia and Michigan and win four more and we have a Senate majority.

I know exactly what you mean! I often feel the same way. It helps me when I just sit down somewhere, have a drink, and watch the hustle and bustle instead of running around like a headless chicken. What did you think of the M Bar? Next time I’m in Jomtien, that’ll probably be my first stop because the guys there are totally my type. But thanks to the orange, the flight prices have become unaffordable 😞

This screams - written by AI. 🖥️

As the Japan tourism industry continues to suffer from the ill-advised remarks by the right-wing Prime Minister on the Taiwan issue, an issue avoided publicly by all previous heads of government, the country's right wing militarists are delighted at the possibility that the Constitution might be changed. Written, it must be remembered, by the Americans and now part of Trump's ever-changing international interference as he wants this Constitution changed, Clause 9 states - “Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes” But many Japanese are totally against such change, especially the nation's young people. Public spaces across Japan are being filled with demonstrations by peope born more than half a century after the end of the war in the Pacific. 22-year old student Gohta Hashimoto is now participating in the anti-change demonstrations which have been getting bigger and bigger. "Until now, I had never thought of the Constitution as something young people needed to fight for," he said. Another student, Yuki Hioki, said at a rally in Tokyo - “The Constitution enables us to stay out of America’s wars, including in this region . . . The thought that might change makes me really angry” With the country's economy suffering from the large drop in Chinese tourism and the ¥ sinking even further, the Prime Minister seemingly knows that she still has Japan's ageing militarists on her side. But if she now loses the confidence of the nation's young people, she will be in for a fight. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/22/japan-youth-pacifist-constitution-trump-iran

+1

+1

I am glad that you had a good time. I have no desire to be there for Songkran.

I find it easier to read, too! Especially if the post is long.

I think that Bill Clinton has much to answer for with the current state of the Democratic Party. He was elected as a generational change candidate, and rather than turning the page on the Reagan revolution's direct assault on the American middle and working classes, he tinkered around the edges but basically embraced the foundations of supply-side economics, the "war on drugs" and the mass incarceration of mostly African-Americans. Ironically, in my opinion, I think Hillary would have been a much better president than Bill was. (A comparison, not an endorsement.) With Biden, he was a shitty campaigner obviously, but as a president I think he was more consequential than Obama. Biden never had Obama's massive legislative majority of 2008, and Biden faced a 6-3 extremist Supreme Court constantly undercutting his legislative initiatives, Obama only had a 5-4 Court to deal with. History doesn't give us a do over, and if it did, and Biden had spent the last two years of his presidency being transitional like he said he would be, and promoting the next generation of leadership, 2024 election would have been a different story. So a reminder to elected politicians, as much as politics is about you, it's not about you and Jim Clyburn - retire, Maxine Waters - retire, Chuck Schumer - retire. It is an us versus a they/them election. And the they/them is the billionaire bros at the trough lapping up billions in untendered government contracts. As much as the Israeli War (why are we calling it the Iran War - they didn't start it) is about covering up the Epstein files. It's also a big insider trading scandal with billions of dollars wor.th of stock trading happening MOMENTS before some insane announcement from the TACO Incompetent.

as they say " technology for you"

thank you for thinking about me but no. Since Christian has doubts about his profile as per originating post I wouldn't risk to go that far and get disappointed or worse, misled. When I get reliable notification that guy in question was seen in Bangkok , then we have different situation and yes , I'd consider rushing there as in Bangkok is easy to wipe one's tears after any kind of disappointment

I'm not yelling intentionality. If you look at previous posts of mine, you'll see the front is normal size. I have no idea why my post here appeared in such a large font, but it does sometimes happen. I'm posting on an ipad, so maybe that has something to do with it. It certainly has nothing to do with me.

So we're sending a son-in-law who manages $6 billion in Arab assets, a real estate developer and a self-proclaimed "hillbilly" with zero experience with negotiations, while the Secretary of State and the diplomatic corps set in the dugout. What could go wrong?

Curiosity led me to have a look. I found the first guy's profile on Tevi.com. The attached photo below from his public profile has a one word caption that says "Jilatin". Google translate says Jilatin means "lick it" in Indonesian, so that would confirm the info @sasoon807 posted above. I suspect once @vinapu sees the photo below, he'll be researching plane tickets to Bali.

I didn't like Bill Clinton or HIllary Clinton or Joe Biden. Based on their history, these are examples of untrustworthy Democrats that committed terrible fuck-ups or at least were complicit in them. Yet I voted for them without fail, because they were the lesser evil, as you described above, why some voters chose 🍊. I remain flummoxed how so many voters never connected the dots about Trump and the MAGA GOP, but so easily do so concerning faults of the Dems. As you said, the economy was likely the deciding factor. To your reckoning, that the Democrats' winning path must focus on the economy, one might ask whether to focus specifically on the economy in battleground states? As the Jacobin piece outlined, if the Democrats can't bring the working class voters in states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin to their side, then they will continue losing. For me, I would make sure the Clintons, the Bidens and Harris drop out of sight. Sweep them under the carpet, and move forward with younger faces and a win-the-working-class through a better economy strategy. Focusing on the economy requires undoing the challenges of tariffs, the exploding debt, and energy costs. That won't be easy. Execution on economic promises may remain a minefield. That said, can the Party afford to leave out other issues such as Incompetency and corruption, as stated by the OP Women's healthcare Closure of rural hospitals Abuses by ICE/ the weakened American democracy and more Lastly, among the "untrustworthy Democrats" the electorate may be turned off by women candidates that laugh like a cackling witch, e.g. Hillary and Kamala. Of course that sounds VERY misogynistic. Yet, how many male political candidates giggle and guffaw? For a somewhat misogynist electorate that perceives the Democrats as the untrustworthy party that is not able to execute on promises, don't voters expect serious answers, not cackling?

I appreciated not having to zoom in to compensate for failing eyesight 😂😂

Sawat, it's been my experience that saying "NO thank you" in an emphatic tone with a smile is enough to stop any 'hassler'. Walking there with constant feelings of pressure and weirdness is missing the whole point )-:

Why are you YELLING??? Just use the regular font like the rest of us. You're really not that important. 🙃

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DXQxm_PEwrU/?igsh=YnY3cmh1aDRnb2Z3

Difficult moral question, My Beloved Sister In Cock. I consulted with the nuns about it. How do you solve a problem like a maniac? Should Trump be killed for wanting genocide? He said he'd end a whole civilization. That's genocide, too And The Genocide Jew Has tried. Many a times Iran may try to kill him. Maybe just once they even will succeed. I'm tired off all his screeds. Who gives a fuck if he bleeds? No one thinks this is what we really need. Oh how do you solve a problem like a maniac? Should Trump be killed for wanting genocide? And just remember, Sis. We could get JD Vance instead. I consulted with Christopher Plummer He came up with a simple tune. JD Vance JD Vance Every morning you greet me Sycophant Yes man brand I don't want you to lead me. Hillbilly lies told so he can rise He thinks he's so clever. JD Vance JD Vance Hope you will lead me never.

Bingo! I strongly agree with one point, and strongly disagree with another. I agree that Trump won because many Independents and people who don't tune into politics saw him as the more acceptable candidate. To me it was less that he was somehow preferred or trusted. He was the lesser evil. I am really glad I watched Mark Halperin's podcasts with voters a lot in 2024. I don't like his tone sucking up to Trump since Trump won. But in 2024 I think Halperin did a great job just letting voters say what they thought. There was a massive army of voters saying they were trying to figure out whether Trump or Harris were the lesser evil. Biden looked like a wreck, inflation was real, Harris could not close the deal, and Trump played on all that. It is a sign of his arrogance, or dementia, or both that he hasn't really even tried to deliver on his promise to lower prices and end forever wars. So even if Independents and Zoomer men had what could be called "trust" with Trump, I think Trump obliterated that. And, unlike nukes in Iran, I doubt that "oblitereated" trust comes back six months later. Hence Republicans freaking out about the midterms. Where I disagree is that Democrats ranting about Trump is enough. I know this will shock everyone, since it is pretty much unknown. But Trump was impeached. He was indicted. He was convicted as a felon. He was called Hitler - by his own Veep. Even The Divine Miss Graham talked unkindly about him before she got down and obediently licked the shit off his ass. This is not to mention all the corruption and rape and sex and money scandals before 2016 when he was first elected. So, while it is quite unknown, I do think attacking Trump as the piece of shit he is has been tried. And it failed. Actually, it did work once. In 2020. For the reason @RockyRoadTravel said. The economy, stupid. Trump fucked up the economy, thanks in large part to COVID, and he got thrown out of office due to that and his temperament. Now he is doing the same shit again. I want Democrats to focus on the economy. My theory is that one thing could have gotten Harris elected: fighting like hell for those expired child tax credits. My argument is weak, because polling showed clearly that those tax credits never really were wildly popular with the general voting public. But polling also showed they were very popular - and helpful - with the tens of millions of Moms and Dads who got them. And a lot of those working class Moms and Dads voted for Trump in 2024, as far as I can tell. Democrats could not even produce a small monthly subsidy that did help offset rising prices for tens of millions of Hispanic, White, Black, and Asian working class families. Again, many of whom voted for Trump because of rising prices. I don't think Kamala Harris talking about democracy with Liz Cheney and Trump's corruption, all while prices rose and Democrats failed to win what they said they were fighting for, was enough to close the deal. The tax credits cut child poverty in half for one year, and then were allowed to expire when Manchin and Sinema refused to support extending them. Biden even in his best moments could not change that. But my theory is that if Democrats consistently fought like hell for good ideas people care about, eventually they would not need Joe Manchin or Kristen Sinema. They could get Sherrod Browns in Ohio and Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota and Claire McCaskill in Missouri, who did and would support economic help for the working class. If we could again elect Democrats in those working class "red" states. The proof of theory as I see it is Mexico. This is what AMLO and Sheinbaum did consistently for years. They literally put money in the hands of the poor and seniors. They fought for and raised wages for the Mexican working class. It was and is wildly popular. They are populists. And a lot of college educated people in Mexico don't like them. But they win because, like in the US, the majority is not college educated people who are affluent and care about democracy. They care about the economy, stupid. Democrats should be doing what Mexico is doing. All it takes is one leader who fights, like AMLO or Sheinbaum. Because AMLO fought like hell for decades Sheinbaum actually does not have to fight as hard. The wind is at her back. At least for now. Maybe we will find such a leader by 2028. If not, I don't think talking about democracy and why Trump sucks is enough. Carney to me is arguably a distant Canadian version of the same. Definitely not an AMLO. More like opposite, as a technocrat. But his secret sauce now is that he is telling Canadians loud and clear that he will fight like hell for Canada. Including by calling out Trump for the weak stupid pussy Trump is. Trump did argue successfully enough in 2024 that I will fight for you, while Kamala fights for us/them. It was a great line. But now he has lost that fight. The question is whether any Democrat can now win it.