Hardkill

So, no progressive era soon?

1) Okay, that's true. However, moderate or centre-left Democrats are still more useful for the Democratic Party. 2) Alright, well I do think that the progressives actually have been able to shift whole Democratic Party more to the left. However, what's the point of that if the Republican Party keeps shifting more and more to the right and if the entire country has been swinging back in favor of the GOP for many months now? In fact, aren't progressives actually making the Democratic Party increasingly less electable by making the party really come off as being too far to the left for most Americans? 3) I have no problem with Progressive officials at both the state and local level. At least those progressives can actually get something concrete done, albeit at a smaller scale.

All of these progressives in Congress including AOC, Jayapal, Bernie, Warren, etc. haven't been able to get any of their progressive agenda passed in Congress for years. Even though they haven't been corrupted by corporate donors like the centrist Democrats have been, the progressives have always had a weaker hand than the centrists Democrats. This is because the progressives always genuinely care about making as much progress as possible for their constituents and for the country as a whole, whereas the centrist Democrats (particularly the most conservative ones like Manchin and Sinema) have always cared much less about changing the status quo. That's why the progressives last Fall had to eventually capitulate to the centrist Dems (especially the right-wing Dems) in Congress with regard to the negotiations on both the BIF bill and the social spending BBB bill. So, what's the point of any progressives in Congress if they are never able to have any real leverage over any of the neoliberal Dems in the establishment?

Over the past few years, there have been countless protests for various issues pertaining to racism, xenophobia, Trumpism, abortion, election results, shootings, vaccine mandates, getting democratic Congressmen to pass key liberal legislation, etc. Yet, it seems like none of that has worked at all to address, fix, or improve any of those issues at all. Even the current political activist groups like the sunrise movements haven't done anything at all to influence a lot more people, business leaders, and government officials throughout our whole country to take climate change seriously. Protesting and political activism used to work in the older days. So, why isn't working anymore?

No I know that. That’s why I am questioning the use of progressives in office, particularly in Congress. I mean do you think that Bernie Sanders, Jayapal, or the progressive squad gotten even one piece of their progressive agenda passed in Congress? Or have all of these congresspeople been totally useless?

hydrogenated substances have trans fats and trans fats are absolutely no good for your health. Even trace amounts of trans fats stay in your blood stream and liver for many weeks or many months, especially if you don't have a healthy diet overall. Trans fats lower your testosterone levels and can cause other hormones in your body to not function well. Plus, they cause build up of plaque in your arteries to a significantly greater degree than bad cholesterol levels and excess triglyceride levels do.

Yeah, but it doesn't seem like the progressive's shifting the conversation further toward progressive values has been accomplishing anything. Am I wrong?

So, you guys think that progressives may not ever be able to win no matter how hard they fight with all of their political activism and protesting and campaign?

I just came back from a bar tonight and actually cold approach a girl there who happened to be a sex worker. She had a bull nose piercing like the kind that pierces your nose septum. I didn't know that she was a sex worker who has done some amateur work until I got to know her during the conversation. She also said that she is polyamorous and bisexual and I talked about that with her. I also asked her questions like does the size and shape of a guy's penis matter, what she thought about anal, the genres of porns she's into, her thoughts on girls getting breast and butt surgeries, why she got into sex work or porn, how it works from a financial perspective, etc. She asked me if I am truly a fan of porn or if I am one of those guys who just watches porn here and there. I told her that I've watched a lot of it since I was about 12-13 years old, and that I've become kind of a porn addict for a very long time. So, she then asked me if I have a pornhub premium subscription, to which I said that I don't and that I've never ever paid for any kind of premium porn subscriptions. She then said that that means I am actually not addicted to porn because otherwise I've would've bought some kind of premium porn subscription and that I actually gotta buy one. I asked her why and she explained to me why that is how and where you can get the best quality of porn. She also told me that she does custom porn vids too and we talked about that. Haha. After she told me her amateur porn screen name, I looked on my phone for some of the preview clips of her vids and told her how much that clip I found of her sucking off this guy in the vid already turned on me. She said thanks. I found a pic of her ass in very sexy shorts on online on my phone and told her that she has a nice phat ass. She was like "yeah some thing like that." I asked her if it was okay if I showed her a pic on my phone of my nude body from the side. She said "Sure. Thanks for asking." After she saw it, she ask why I was posing like a girl. I said that it's because I like to show off my ass. She was like "Oh I see." So asked with a smirk if she liked my body, and she said that it's okay but that she's more into the dad bod kind of look. Then I looked at her ass in person and asked if she liked doggystyle. She said "that's a dumb question." I then chuckled and said "So of course you do." She said "yup." I said "Me too. You know, this may be inappropriate but I would love to do you both standing doggystyle and you on all fours doggystyle as I grab you sexy brown bubblebutt cheeks. I'd also whisper sweet nothings into your ear." She then went "wtf!" So I said "Oh, sorry if that creeped you out." Her response was "right" in a sarcastic manner. I then said "that was probably too much information that I shared." she said "yeah." I apologized and steered the conversation towards more normal everyday kinds of topics. We talked about more regular stuff for several minutes longer. By the end of the conversation we exchanged numbers. I know that in general that shouldn't talk explicit about sex with a girl you just met until you have had sex with her. Leo also said in his how to get laid series said that the reason why you don't ever talk explicitly about sex with a girl or just go up to a girl and right away tell her bluntly that you want to fuck her because sex is generally too taboo. But this chick was a real sex worker and highly sexually liberated. Yet, I did end up making her feel very uncomfortable when I told her how I'd fuck her. So, is that because even girls like this one still feel that it is too taboo to be sexually explicit with a guy she just met and hasn't had sex yet?

Ever since 2020, we have had waves of violent crimes that have caused the annual rate of murders to be higher than at any point since 1996. Nobody in America seems to be able to stop the constant rise of extreme right-wing fascism of the Republican Party. Everyday, I keep worrying about what will happen if or when the Republicans take back control of the House, Senate, and the White House by 2024. The economic inequality in our country has reached its highest level in 52 years and it's only going to get increasingly as corporations and the rich are able to keep getting more economically powerful. Noam Chomsky has kept saying that the Republican Party has arguably become the 'most dangerous organization on earth,' but not enough people in America are getting it. He also has been trying to tell everyone in America for years that the future of organized human life is at grave risk and yet the Republican Party keeps making it worse and not enough Democrats are taking it seriously enough. How scared should Americans be about their safety and survival?

I didn't imply to her that I would rape her though.

yeah, he must be kidding himself. Also, I am not sure how useful neighborhood watches are, especially considering how much violent crime has been getting worse for 2 years now.

Okay, I get that. But if she already a super sex positive chick who has already had tons of freaky and risky sex, then what does she fear will happen to her if she gets really sexual or has sex with a guy who comes off weird and socially uncalibrated and doesn't pay her for it?

I get both of these states have high if not very high rural populations per capita. Yet, these states actually rank high in overall education level and are more secular than most states are. I mentioned in a previous thread about how Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine have some of the highest rural populations per capita, but they are still some of the most liberal states in the country (with some moderate republican leaders in the New England region). As for Utah, I understand that the state is greatly dominated by the mormon culture. However, that state actually has one of the highest urban populations per capita and is considered to have an undoubtedly high overall level education. Virginia has become a mostly safe blue state and Georgia has become a purple state trending toward blue, even though they are highly religious states that are part of the Bible Belt. So, why haven't Montana, Alaska, and Utah been able to transition to being more liberal?

We all know that the southern states in America have had more white people with old racist views per capita than the coastal states, northern states, and some midwestern states do. They say that the more racially diverse a place is the less racially conservative or racist its population will be. However, there are about eight southern states that are more racially diverse than a majority of all of the states in the country including Texas, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Alabama. In fact, Texas has become arguably the 4th most racially/ethnically/culturally diverse states in the country while Florida has been estimated to be one of the 7th most racially/ethnically/culturally diverse states in America. https://wallethub.com/edu/most-least-diverse-states-in-america/38262 So, why do all of these southern states still have more racist or more racially conservative people than other liberal states that don't even have as many black and brown people per capita as they do?

But how does paying her for sex or dirty talk make her feel safe? It still doesn't add up to me. I already know about Mode One, but I think she might've been the one who got too scared.

I see... So, then why are progressives bothering to try to bring back labor unions more into power?

So, you believe that the only key to real progress is if the vast majority of the common folk in America unite together against the corruption that needs to be vanquished? And you say that the only way that could happen is if the core of the entire regime becomes totally rotten?

So, thats it? The working and middle class people have no choice but to just give up because they are all powerless victims?

Yeah, I can see how the free trade policies would negatively affect labor unions. But what kind of propaganda did the business leaders and lobbyists put out that convinced a lot more Americans to not have or not join labor unions?

I don't get why labor unions haven't been as prevalent as they used to be several decades ago. They always worked out well for most Americans.

Some of what you guys are saying is valid. However, I think now really know why southern states that have a fair to high amount of racial diversity are still racist or racially conservative. The southern states that have a moderate to somewhat high amount of racial/ethnic diversity like Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi and Tennessee still have a relatively low to barely medium level of overall diversity including a low level of cultural and socioeconomic diversity. These states also have a high to very high rural population (by percentage) compared to the rest of the country. These states are further considered to be the 5 most religious states in the country. Alabama is arguably recognized as the most religious/most tradition-oriented state in the country. Tennessee has a somewhat high population density overall but Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Mississippi all have low to barely average level of overall population density. Lastly, all of five of these states are considered to be some of the least educated states in the country. Mississippi has the 2nd lowest overall education level per capita, Louisiana has the 3rd lowest overall education level per capita, Arkansas has the 4th lowest overall education level per capita, and Tennessee has the 10th lowest overall education level per capita. As for Oklahoma, it does a medium to high amount of overall diversity including a somewhat high amount of racial/ethnic and cultural diversity. However, it has one of the lowest levels of socioeconomic diversity in the country. The state also is approx. the 6th least educated state in the country and is approx. the 8th most religious state in America. Additionally, it still has a higher percentage of rural residents than most other states in America have and still has a low population density overall. The southern states that still have much racism but actually have had a high to very high racial/ethnic diversity such as Texas, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia each still have relatively high to very high religious populations. Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia also have each had pretty low to very low education levels per capita. Though in recent years, each of these states have had a significant uptick in the number of educated folk. Florida actually has a somewhat high overall level of education per capita and is less religious than the other four states are, which is why it may be less racist than Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. However, each of these five states have actually become increasingly much less racist over time largely because of how much each of these states' diversity, urban and suburban populations, overall population densities have all been booming over the past two decades. Regarding Virginia, that state has actually no longer had much racism. This is very likely due to state having become one of the most educated states in the country, having now higher urban and suburban populations than rural populations, having had a high population density in recent years, and having a high amount of overall diversity. Maryland has in fact been always kind of an exception in the South. It actually was never as racist as any of the other southern states were, totally supported civil rights and voting rights for all colored people in the mid-1900s, and has been loyal to liberals and the Democratic Party since 1992, particularly at the national level.

I think I now, figured out why Republicans have been dominant in Montana, Alaska, and Utah. Montana has one of the highest rural populations (by percentage) in America, one of the least densely populated states, and is one the least diverse states in America. Alaska has a high rural population (by percentage), is THE LEAST densely populated state, and has a slightly below average education level per capita. Utah is one of the most religious states in the country (including the fact that it has an abnormal amount of fundamentalists), low population density overall, and is one of the least diverse states in America. I also now get why Democrats have been dominant in Virginia, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. Virginia has now gained such a high education level per capita, that it is now considered to be the 7th most educated state in the country. Also, Virginia has in recent years had a high amount of overall diversity and a high population density overall. Plus, over the past few decades, its rural population has been continually shrinking while its urban and suburban populations have been growing. Its rural population by percentage is now slightly below medium in comparison to all other states in America. Vermont has become approx. the 5th most educated state in the country and is tied with Maine for being the 2nd most secular state in America. A lot of this can be attributed to the influx of many liberals from other east coast states like Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut our the past few decades. New Hampshire has become one of the top 10 most educated states in the country. Moreover, it's been tied with Massachusetts as being the most secular state in America. Like Vermont, the state also has had an influx of many liberals from other east coast states like Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut over the past few decades. Maine has been tied with Vermont for being 2nd most secular state in America. Furthermore, Republicans in the New England region have always been more moderate than most other Republicans throughout the country. The state also has a relatively high education level per capita.

So, when will the US be ready for a major change?

But why do I need to be socially calibrated and sexually escalate with a girl who is already a very sexually liberated sex worker? I wonder why saying something sexually explicit like the way I said it is disrespectful to a girl who is totally sex positive and doesn't seem to view sex as something that is a big deal or as being a personal matter.