85.2%

[Jersey Girl]

At this point, Trump could not only steal from American taxpayers like he did in his previous administration, but he could hold a press conference to outline exactly how he'll enrich himself and his family on the back of Americans this time, and he would receive praise for his genius.

That's what I fear will happen -- that a significant faction of his sycophantic supporters are so delusional that they will continue support and praise him, no matter how bad things get for any others than his family and ultra-wealthy friends and supporters.

Quit worrying and get some sleep. G'night!

[Gunnar]

At this point, Trump could not only steal from American taxpayers like he did in his previous administration, but he could hold a press conference to outline exactly how he'll enrich himself and his family on the back of Americans this time, and he would receive praise for his genius.

I'm not sure I actually am any more optimistic than others here about how much incompetence American conservatives are prepared to accept. I recognize that there's a lot of slack for anyone who mouths the right conservative shibboleths. Indeed, I might be less critical than others here about that sectarian tolerance. How much blame a government deserves for economic or political events is a fuzzy question, to me. There are a lot of plausible excuses and up to a point there is room for people to reach different conclusions.

It's just that I'm expecting disasters so big that they will go past that point. I'm expecting things that will be felt, not for half the next term, but for generations. I'm anticipating things that scar the national soul, as it were. I have no idea exactly what they will be, but the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and heading into the next four years of history with Donald Trump and his team at the helm seems like walking out into the jungle naked with no food or water. I'm expecting things to be bad.

I call that optimistic, because national scars have a wide range of badness. I'm thinking of things that are, say, only as bad as the Great Depression, and not nearly as bad as the Third Reich.[

I fear that I may not live long enough to see a return to the democracy, liberties and a truly just and fair society, if that ever happens, and that Trump's horrid policies and mendacity might even hasten my death and that of my loved ones.

[Gunnar]

Quit worrying and get some sleep. G'night!

Thanks Jersey Girl! I may not succeed in quitting my worries, but I will take your advice and go to bed and try to sleep, right after ending this post.

[Jersey Girl]

Quit worrying and get some sleep. G'night!

Thanks Jersey Girl! I may not succeed in quitting my worries, but I will take your advice and go to bed and try to sleep, right after ending this post.

Gunner.

You need to stop worrying, stop being afraid of what may be, and realize that the only control you've had over any of this was your vote. That's it. That's all you have and all you've ever had. Whatever happens in the next 4 years is going to happen with or without you. Preferrably with you. If you're no longer around, that's for the younger folks to deal with.

You don't have to follow every single event, prediction, or word that emerges from Trump or his team. The man can pump out chaos faster than any of us has a second to begin to digest it before he starts up yet another chaos-making spree.

Don't internalize his chaos.

I've stopped watching political commentary entirely. I have one ear to the ground but beyond reading a headline or two, I've given it up in favor of living life. Do you really want to spend your heartbeats on some guy? It doesn't matter what he claims or what the predictions are. Does he have a history of following through on his claims?

Forget it. Get some sleep. Get outdoors. Go take a hike, my friend. Love your people, live your life, and sing!

But don't stop posting. You know I can't sleep without seeing your latest post.

[Gunnar]

At this point, Trump could not only steal from American taxpayers like he did in his previous administration, but he could hold a press conference to outline exactly how he'll enrich himself and his family on the back of Americans this time, and he would receive praise for his genius.

I'm not sure I actually am any more optimistic than others here about how much incompetence American conservatives are prepared to accept. I recognize that there's a lot of slack for anyone who mouths the right conservative shibboleths. Indeed, I might be less critical than others here about that sectarian tolerance. How much blame a government deserves for economic or political events is a fuzzy question, to me. There are a lot of plausible excuses and up to a point there is room for people to reach different conclusions.

It's just that I'm expecting disasters so big that they will go past that point. I'm expecting things that will be felt, not for half the next term, but for generations. I'm anticipating things that scar the national soul, as it were. I have no idea exactly what they will be, but the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and heading into the next four years of history with Donald Trump and his team at the helm seems like walking out into the jungle naked with no food or water. I'm expecting things to be bad.

I call that optimistic, because national scars have a wide range of badness. I'm thinking of things that are, say, only as bad as the Great Depression, and not nearly as bad as the Third Reich.

I fear that I may not live long enough to see a return to the democracy, liberties and a truly just and fair society, if that ever happens, and that Trump's horrid policies and mendacity might even hasten my death and that of my loved ones.

[Hound of Heaven]

Hound,

First, we must categorize the progressive movement as far left, identifying it as a fringe movement within our party. Next, focus on creating a party that embraces everyone,

So far in your posting, you've spent all of your time on part one, categorizing all the things you think indicate progressives have coopted Democrats. Honestly, this is essentially the same thing our resident Trumpers do. You haven't provided any examples of something you think Democrats can do to "embrace everyone" (aside from avoid criticizing Trump, same as Ceeboo).

And then on the one hand you write:

Young Americans aspire to find happiness, smile, own a home, and achieve success without accumulating debt after completing college

Agreed. But on the other hand, you say:

On the Republican side, there are numerous memes and videos featuring Republican women smiling and laughing as they mock Taylor Swift, Nicki Minaj, Jennifer Lopez, and various other celebrities

In your world, somehow the right has a magical power to fuel dreams of home ownership and college without debt by crapping on celebrities and rallying around MMA. I'm trying to understand how it is the left is supposed to compete with that. You haven't provided any examples.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documen ... y-platform

To convey my deep affection for the party, I invite you to read the 1988 Democratic Party platform that I have linked. This message fosters a constructive perspective, enabling both Democrats and Republicans to appreciate Democratic policies positively. If you decide to read it, you'll realize that the message does not portray America as inherently racist. Examine the part discussing the perspective of democrats on illegal drugs in 1988. This memory is vivid, as it was a significant issue even at that time. Our perspective back then was to utilize every available means, including military action, to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Does that ring a bell? Examine the part that discusses our perspective as democrats on multicultural heritage, emphasizing our commitment to ensuring equal access to government services. This section is entirely standard and does not portray America and Americans unfavorably in an effort to elevate minorities. This is the correct way to do it. Why can't we return to a straightforward message like the one presented in 1988, for instance? This message embodies the democratic party I support.

[canpakes]

Hound, here’s a link to the 2024 Democratic Party platform. If there are troublesome elements within it, it may be more practical to discuss them from the standpoint of the current platform rather than refer to a version from 36 years ago.

You can search for terms like diversity, equity and inclusion individually (‘DEI’ itself isn’t found within it) to critique the party’s approach, and suggest alternatives.

https://democrats.org/wp-content/upload ... ATFORM.pdf

[Moksha]

At this point, Trump could not only steal from American taxpayers like he did in his previous administration, but he could hold a press conference to outline exactly how he'll enrich himself and his family on the back of Americans this time, and he would receive praise for his genius.

You are also thinking of Trump ordering Trump Bibles and Trump golden sneakers for each member of his administration and soldiers in the armed forces.

[Gadianton]

I appreciate your perspective, Hound, but I think there's a lot to untangle here. Canpakes provided the current platform; if you just skim over that, are there any significant differences that you think are a problem?

A significant problem is distinguishing between the actual progressive influences in the party, which I believe are real I just don't have a good grasp on that quantity, and how much of the progressive influence is imaginary, resulting from right-wing messaging about progressive influence. All of the cardinal sins of progressives I hear about come from right-wingers. The fact that somewhere there exists a math book that says that math, the way it's been taught, is racist, doesn't indicate that Democrats believe that math is racist. However, upon discovering the book, the right-wing outrage machine will have half of the country convinced within a week that Democrats believe math is racist. Same with trans athletes, I don't know a single "pro trans-athlete" person yet the constant coverage by right-wing media has convinced half the nation that the average Democrat is a big trans athlete fan.

But the entanglement gets worse. Back in the 80s, Ronald Reagan (to my knowledge) didn't get up in front of the country and go on racist rants. So how do you let that go? We can see it on this forum. The right-wingers are fired up about the latest nonsense and the Democrats and forced-to-be-Democrats like me get sucked into a debate about something that would probably never get discussed otherwise. Lets say my right-wing friend comes out shooting one day about trans-athletes or drug needle programs, which he has many times. I get forced into a position of looking up the facts about the situation, and in that process it usually means dispelling exaggerations or misinformation, which now puts me in the de facto position of being pro-drug needle, at least to a certain degree -- something that wasn't on my radar prior.

One thing I did point out when Trump made his "dog and cats" accusations, is that this baiting keeps Democrats locked into a culture war that isn't helping them. Here is what I said back then:

https://www.discussmormonism.com/viewto ... s#p2873500

Aside from the spotlight, the big unintended benefit that I see is that it triggers the left into melting down about racism. Republicans are either racist themselves or it's just one of Trump's "warts" that they accept. But the left melting down about racism puts them in their weakest spot tactically, in my opinion, because it affirms them as the DEI party that doesn't know how to do anything else but worry about inclusion.

Since non-whites now are also officially racist against themselves as Trump supporters, there's really no reason to protect anyone. But an argument can be made for not responding to the baiting anyway. The same argument as ignoring the school bully. When you respond, you just get sucked into a manufactured drama that doesn't have a good way forward.

But this is all only one aspect of the complexity. It gets even worse when moving on to talking points vs. real policy, and any real hopes of change from real policy. The Democratic party can stand for whatever they want -- how to bring it about in reality?

[Hound of Heaven]

A significant problem is distinguishing between the actual progressive influences in the party, which I believe are real I just don't have a good grasp on that quantity, and how much of the progressive influence is imaginary, resulting from right-wing messaging about progressive influence

If we continue to think that the number one reason progressives face criticism is due to Republicans trying to portray them as irrational, we will fail to confront the issues within the party. It seems that your point is centered around the necessity of safeguarding the progressive agenda at all costs, as we cannot permit the Republicans to be right in any way regarding progressives. What if I am right and the progressive agenda has become too polarizing for American voters to support? How can we engage in a conversation about advancing beyond their agenda to create a party that resonates with average Americans if we are perpetually focused on shielding them from the perceived threats posed by Republicans?

https://youtu.be/hEJDcAKNr7o?si=hGpOKNaDKjJAevGC

Please take a moment to watch this video featuring Democrat strategist Julie Roginsky, as she discusses the importance of our party returning to a foundation of common sense. What she articulates in this video aligns with my message: we have overlooked the fact that it is ordinary individuals who elect representatives to office. In the video, she addresses several hard truths, emphasizing the need to cease certain behaviors that make us appear ineffective in communicating with voters. She begins by stating that we are not the party of common sense when we engage with Hispanic voters calling them LatinX.

We do not embody common sense when we appear unsure of how to respond to progressive students burning Columbia University. We don't appear to be the party of common sense when we ask individuals to include pronouns after their names; it gives the impression that we are out of touch with reality.

Essentially, she suggests that rather than communicating with everyone in the same manner, we are always attempting to tailor our conversations based on factors such as skin color, gender, or racial background. She expresses her belief that individuals are weary of the pandering and that this is not reflective of their true thoughts; they simply desire to be treated like everyone else.

I concur with nearly everything she expresses in this video. She seems hesitant to assign blame to the progressives, likely aware that doing so could provoke a backlash against her. However, it's clear that she's attempting to communicate that the loss in the election can be attributed to the progressives.

Consider the trend of including pronouns after one's name that has gained popularity among progressives. Apologies, but that simply gives the impression that one lacks knowledge and the capacity for effective communication. Therefore, that is why she claims we no longer resemble the party of common sense.

We already have the terms Hispanic or Latino; why is there a need to refer to Hispanics or Latinos as LatinX? This attempt to alter the language in order to uplift a specific group ultimately backfired, resulting in Trump securing 13% more of the Hispanic vote compared to 2020.

Everything she highlights in this video stems from the fact that we, the 88% of rational democrats, have permitted the progressives to dictate the agenda for the last 15 years, leading to a growing frustration among Americans in trying to navigate how to engage with individuals based on their appearance or beliefs. The progressives have made life more complicated for the everyday average American, and they elected individuals whom they believe will simplify life. That’s precisely why she continues to emphasize the importance of returning to our roots as the party of common sense.

I’m not suggesting that progressives shouldn’t be included in the party; rather, it’s important to recognize that they represent a small segment of the overall party. Many everyday Americans have become weary of their complex agenda, which was clearly dismissed in this election. The most challenging aspect will be locating Democrats who are unafraid to confront the progressive bullies and assert that their actions are detrimental to the party.

Do you think that the typical 40 under Democrat, particularly those who are progressive, is even aware of what a blue dog Democrat is? If so, isn't it concerning for our party that the more pragmatic faction has been completely overlooked over the past 15 years, as the progressive wing has effectively silenced all other factions within the party?