“In that time, American democracy has withstood civil war, world wars, acts of terrorism and technological and societal changes that would make the Founders’ head spin.”
This is a rare instance of an apostrophe being used correctly, but the noun following it being wrong. What's the opposite of a hydra?
I was born and raised in Perez’ district, and I’m shocked that she even won at all. It’s the deepest Southern part of the state, both literally and figuratively. She only did win in 2022 because MAGA primaried their multi-term incumbent Jaime Herrera Buetler for voting to impeach Trump. She’s holding that seat by the skin of her teeth and will no doubt lose it in 2024. So whatever hard right crap she’s spewing now is for the sake of pure self-preservation. It won’t work, of course, but she has no political future in that district nor any other most likely so she has nothing to lose.
Gleusenkamp Perez is going to work with which Republicans to secure the southern border? The ones that just voted against the bill to secure the southern border? Yeah, I'd watch my back around her, she seems like the type to switch parties if it served her ambition.
Golden is not golden, he’s got some cheap metal tarnishing him. Perez is doing such heavy lifting for Trump I expect she’ll drop that load on her foot.
Whenever you wonder "how did Maine, in the same year they elected Biden by a comfortable margin, manage to also re-elect Susan Collins by a comfortable margin?" just remember Maine Democrats like this.
In the far future when the planet recovers enough, the civilisation of mutant roaches will recover Golden’s text from a partially melted SSD and it will become a prominent footnote in the Intelligent Cockroach Wikipedia’s entry on ‘normalcy bias’.
What the actual hell? We really should make elected officials take a civics test before they can run. None of them understand economics either apparently.
Hell I’ll pay more for gas just have my bodily autonomy. Looks like these eegits are willing to sell their souls.
It’s mind-boggling that Rep. Perez assumes she’ll be able to work with MAGA. They will strip her right to work and to vote just the same. Not to mention her birthright Citizenship.
Thomas Dewey was supposed to win the 1948 election in a landslide - all of the polls said so. There was no debate between him and President Truman, but both candidates campaigned vigorously by train. Both were accompanied by their wives, and had celebrity surrogates - Reagan for Truman (what the hell happened to Reagan?) and Ginger Rogers for Dewey. The Democratic Party was not just in disarray, but split, with Wallace taking the progressive wing, and Thurmond taking the racist wing. Yet, Truman prevailed, but had the polls and pundits been right, Dewey would have been a good president, more progressive than today's republicans, even more progressive than some of today's Democrats, like the two worthless ones you referenced above. And he was an honorable man, with a wife who was an asset to his campaign. Frances Dewey would have been a good First Lady.
Yep. Truman by 1948 had a lot of negatives--FDR's people hated him (including FDR's worthless sons), Republicans had just taken Congress in a big midterm sweep, progressives abandoned him over his anti-communism and the country was just dealing with a bout of inflation.
However, he saw a huge opportunity when Dewey (a liberal Republican) ran on a liberal platform, while congressional Republicans (led by Taft) were far Right--Truman called a special session asking Congress to pass the measures Dewey endorsed. They were stuck--either give Truman big policy wins, or show a split between their wing and Dewey's. They balked, and Truman then ran against a "do nothing Congress" and barely mentioned Dewey's name at all.
He embraced civil rights (at the time, blacks couldn't vote in the South but were key voting blocs in big northern states, and nearly split among the parties). This helped him lock in some big states, but of course the Dixiecrats bolted. He lost a few states to Thurmond, but kept most upper South states. His aggressive courting of labor and liberal programs took a lot of support away from Wallace's progressives. And his aggressive campaign, clear message, and the wackiness of the Dixiecrats and progressives that year helped him win moderates. Also didn't hurt that Dewey played a very "sit on his lead and try not to make mistakes" campaign.
Let me be clear:
Baby showers with loads of fun ladies I haven't seen in ages, good food & drinks=awesome
Baby showers with mandatory watching the opening of every. single. onesie + those stupid games = should've just sent a gift
“This election is about the economy, not democracy,”
Let this be his epitaph
“In that time, American democracy has withstood civil war, world wars, acts of terrorism and technological and societal changes that would make the Founders’ head spin.”
This is a rare instance of an apostrophe being used correctly, but the noun following it being wrong. What's the opposite of a hydra?
ONG! NO! What a traitor. Is he a MAGA plant on the Dem party?
Democrats have ONE job to do this November: BEAT TRUMP
That’s it. We don’t do that nothing else matters. If we don’t win we lose our seat at the table.
The New York Times Editorial Page branch of the Democratic Party has been heard from. Now fuck off.
I was born and raised in Perez’ district, and I’m shocked that she even won at all. It’s the deepest Southern part of the state, both literally and figuratively. She only did win in 2022 because MAGA primaried their multi-term incumbent Jaime Herrera Buetler for voting to impeach Trump. She’s holding that seat by the skin of her teeth and will no doubt lose it in 2024. So whatever hard right crap she’s spewing now is for the sake of pure self-preservation. It won’t work, of course, but she has no political future in that district nor any other most likely so she has nothing to lose.
Gleusenkamp Perez is going to work with which Republicans to secure the southern border? The ones that just voted against the bill to secure the southern border? Yeah, I'd watch my back around her, she seems like the type to switch parties if it served her ambition.
Well, at least they’re showing their true colors now. They’ll be booted out in due time. Meanwhile, we’re supporting Biden/Harris.
Golden is not golden, he’s got some cheap metal tarnishing him. Perez is doing such heavy lifting for Trump I expect she’ll drop that load on her foot.
Whenever you wonder "how did Maine, in the same year they elected Biden by a comfortable margin, manage to also re-elect Susan Collins by a comfortable margin?" just remember Maine Democrats like this.
In the far future when the planet recovers enough, the civilisation of mutant roaches will recover Golden’s text from a partially melted SSD and it will become a prominent footnote in the Intelligent Cockroach Wikipedia’s entry on ‘normalcy bias’.
What the actual hell? We really should make elected officials take a civics test before they can run. None of them understand economics either apparently.
Hell I’ll pay more for gas just have my bodily autonomy. Looks like these eegits are willing to sell their souls.
It’s mind-boggling that Rep. Perez assumes she’ll be able to work with MAGA. They will strip her right to work and to vote just the same. Not to mention her birthright Citizenship.
Let's step around these clout-chasing assholes and rally, I say. Focus on what we can control!
We have our first Quislings, our "Democrats for Vichy".
Had the exact same thought this morning.
Thomas Dewey was supposed to win the 1948 election in a landslide - all of the polls said so. There was no debate between him and President Truman, but both candidates campaigned vigorously by train. Both were accompanied by their wives, and had celebrity surrogates - Reagan for Truman (what the hell happened to Reagan?) and Ginger Rogers for Dewey. The Democratic Party was not just in disarray, but split, with Wallace taking the progressive wing, and Thurmond taking the racist wing. Yet, Truman prevailed, but had the polls and pundits been right, Dewey would have been a good president, more progressive than today's republicans, even more progressive than some of today's Democrats, like the two worthless ones you referenced above. And he was an honorable man, with a wife who was an asset to his campaign. Frances Dewey would have been a good First Lady.
Yep. Truman by 1948 had a lot of negatives--FDR's people hated him (including FDR's worthless sons), Republicans had just taken Congress in a big midterm sweep, progressives abandoned him over his anti-communism and the country was just dealing with a bout of inflation.
However, he saw a huge opportunity when Dewey (a liberal Republican) ran on a liberal platform, while congressional Republicans (led by Taft) were far Right--Truman called a special session asking Congress to pass the measures Dewey endorsed. They were stuck--either give Truman big policy wins, or show a split between their wing and Dewey's. They balked, and Truman then ran against a "do nothing Congress" and barely mentioned Dewey's name at all.
He embraced civil rights (at the time, blacks couldn't vote in the South but were key voting blocs in big northern states, and nearly split among the parties). This helped him lock in some big states, but of course the Dixiecrats bolted. He lost a few states to Thurmond, but kept most upper South states. His aggressive courting of labor and liberal programs took a lot of support away from Wallace's progressives. And his aggressive campaign, clear message, and the wackiness of the Dixiecrats and progressives that year helped him win moderates. Also didn't hurt that Dewey played a very "sit on his lead and try not to make mistakes" campaign.