Hardkill

Why doesn't someone as brilliant as him realize that in the end he will pay the same kind of price the rich German businessmen did after they sided with the Nazis?

Just as men are socially conditioned to not cry as much as women, women are conversely socially conditioned not to come off as angry unless they happened to be more in a position of power such as teacher/principal in a school or a boss in a company and they rightfully yell at the student or employee for doing something very wrong. Other examples of this being considered acceptable are a female drill instructor in the military aggressively yelling at new recruits or subordinates or a mom yelling at her kids for bad behavior. Yet, even women in those kinds of positions are still discouraged from displaying as much anger as men who hold the same kinds of positions of power. Otherwise, women and girls who express anger will often be labeled as "emotional," "hysterical," or "aggressive," which can be damaging to their self-esteem and relationships. Women of color are especially subject to stereotyping and tropes, such as the "angry Black woman" or the "submissive Asian woman." These stereotypes can be even more damaging and limiting to such women. Even Kara in Supergirl had to be lectured by her boss about how it's a bad look when any woman comes off mad: Yet, when a man unleashes his rage (at the right time of course), especially in response to a perceived injustice or threat, it's often viewed as a sign of strength, authority, leadership, and masculine. White men are especially more allowed by society to display aggression and anger more so than men of color are, unless we are talking about a typical country in Africa that's ruled by black men, a country in Asia that's ruled by asian men, a Latin American country that's ruled by Latin men, or a country in the Middle East that's ruled by Arab men. This is one of my favorite scenes from Boys. Billy Butcher came off as a real badass leader who knows how to command the room like a real man: I bet most people who watched this were like "God damn! You got balls of steel! You showed them whose boss!"

Yeah, the German people were clearly so extremely desperate because of how dire their economic crisis was by the 1930s that they felt like they had absolutely no choice but to let a mad fascist dictator run their country and have him do whatever it took for their country to survive. However, if it wasn't for the Treaty of Versailles then I think that the German people never would've resorted to fascism and never would've allowed someone like Hilter to rise to power.

Dan Pfieffer and the Pod Save America bros say that if the Left and Democratic party with a robust messaging machine that can combat the right-wing media machine and all of the misinformation out there then Democrats may very well lose again in 2028 and every other presidential election in the future. In fact, more and more Democratic strategists and commentators out there are realizing how much of a very serious problem this is. Nothing else will matter.

That why Democratic strategists are seriously figuring out how to improve their messaging overall, particularly to these kinds of audiences who have been easily deceived by Trump and MAGA. Actually, as much as I believe Cenk and Ana are wrong for reaching out to these perverted right-wing fringe media commentators, they are right about the idea of needing to reach out to those voters out there who used to vote for Obama in 2008 and 2012, but then turned into Trump Supporters from 2016 to 2024. Many of those voters should be won back by the Democratic party. Otherwise, we may never win big elections ever again.

Although Professor Lichtman incorrectly predicted the 2024 election, he provided valuable insights as a US historian on how President Biden will likely be remembered and his lasting impact on the country:

Okay, that's what I thought and that was the argument that I made on that thread of mine even though midterms are always a referendum on the president and his party, the president's party almost always loses badly in the midterms, congressional elections have become more nationalized than ever before, and most pundits/strategists predicted that the Democrats were going to get killed in the midterms and Biden had historically low approval ratings at the time because of a number of things including the sour economy, the COVID problem still around at the time, people being very worried about the War in Ukraine when it broke out that year, and people just getting tired of Biden: You gotta admit that Biden and his party did unbelievably well then. The only other times US History the party holding the White House did as well as the Dems did in the 2022 midterms were 1934, 1962, 1998, and 2002. So, why did people buy Reagan's "It's Morning in America" optimism by 1984 even though Biden's economy was actually far superior in every way according to top independent economists? What did Truman have or do that got to win another term even though he presided over much inflation than Biden/Harris did? I think that it was actually because of two things: 1. During the mid to late 1900s there wasn't the kind of brain-rotting, anger, and resentment we have had in recent years caused by the rise of the internet/social media. This has greatly amplified everyone's negative perceptions on every issue to such unprecedented levels. 2. During the mid to late 1900s there wasn't historic levels of economic inequality in our country like we've had in recent years, which has further hurt so many Americans.

But if it wasn't for the media environment we are in then Trump never would've even come close to becoming president.

I understand that, but how do you explain why Democrats won the 2022 midterms when inflation was at 9% that year? Truman won re-election in 1948 when inflation was 20% at its peak during his first term and was at around 11% by the 1948 election year. Reagan won re-election in 1984 when inflation was at 14% at its peak during his first term and was at around 3.5-4% by the 1984 election year. The economy under Biden was much stronger than it was under Bush in 2004, but Bush got re-elected then. The economy under Biden was much stronger than it was under Obama in 2012, but Obama got re-elected then. I think it was primarily because of misinformation and the internet/social media brain-rot along with racism, sexism, and xenophobia that caused Trump to win.

I find it hard to believe that Inflation itself mattered that much, especially when inflation levels had been at normal levels for over a year and half by the 2024 election day. The economy at that time was also the strongest since the incredible 1990s boom. Also, why did the Democrats win the 2022 midterms overall when inflation peaked at over 9% that year? Truman and Reagan each won re-election during times when inflation was much worse and the economy was significantly weaker than it was under Biden/Harris in 2024: Obama and George W. Bush also won re-election during times when the economy was in much weaker shape than it was under Biden/Harris in 2024.

@Princess Arabia I am not saying that it's right or fair that women and people of color are shamed more than men are for coming off angry. In fact, I think it is unjust in many respects that these archaic notions of how men and women should act still matter to most people even in a developed country like America.

Yeah, unless that guy is very angry about the war in Gaza because he has family and relatives from there, he's totally off the wall.

So, then how would you guys compare him to previous US presidents?

Here's what Leo said about Afghanistan: If you blame Biden for Ukraine, then you would've blamed Trump for it too if it happened under his watch. In fact, Trump would've let Putin take all of Ukraine just because he's been in bed with Putin. The military-industrial complex and the rest of the deep state are primarily to be blamed for pushing the US and NATO to provoke Russia into attacking Ukraine. Obama and every other Democratic president before him would've done very much the same thing as Biden did. The Bushes and Reagan would've been way more hawkish on this matter if it happened during either of their presidencies. We have no idea how much influence these powerful lobbies have on even the President of the United States.

Dude, almost nobody in the US cares about Afghanistan anymore. People were so sick and tired of it. Also, the people of Afghanistan made it clear enough that they wanted the Taliban to rule the country because that's the kind of regime they believe in. I used to worry about those people's rights and freedom being taken away from them, but I eventually learned that the people in that country did not want westernized democracy because their culture is far too underdeveloped for it. They want authoritarian governance, especially in the way of Islamic fundamentalism. Plus, Biden was the first president in decades to not start any new wars or preside over wars with US boots on the ground, he still faced criticism. To put this into perspective, let's look at the conflicts during the presidencies of his predecessors: George W. Bush: Initiated the War in Afghanistan (2001) and the Iraq War (2003). Barack Obama: Continued the War in Afghanistan and initiated military interventions in Libya (2011) and Syria (2014). Donald Trump: Continued the War in Afghanistan and initiated airstrikes in Syria (2017) and Iraq (2020). Moreover, his planning of uniting NATO and Ukraine against Russia was so brilliant and so successful that it has been widely regarded by experts as being one of the greatest foreign/military triumphs by the US in the history of the country. Besides the defeat of the Soviet Union and the ending of the Cold War under Reagan/HW Bush during the late 80s to early 90s, the prevention of Putin and Russia from taking over much of Ukraine will go down as arguably the greatest success America has ever had since the end of WWII under FDR/Truman.

I think the point of what Dr. K is saying is that many young men, especially, many white men feel like the Democratic party has been leaving them behind, while feeling like the Republican party cares about them a lot more. That's because even though Trump and the GOP have no good policies for addressing the anxieties or problems of younger men, Trump and the Republicans have done a lot more than the Democrats have to reach out to, relate with, and feign empathy with younger men in recent years.

I hate to say it OP, but I really don't think he legitimately lost the election. Yes, Musk greatly contributed to Trump's win by polluting the entire X platform with endless amounts of misinformation, right-wing propaganda, and anti-mainstream propaganda. That caused a lot of people on X to be brainwashed into voting against Harris. However, there is no definitive proof that Musk, Trump, or anyone else who is a part of the MAGA cult in America had somehow rigged the system by actually causing widespread voter fraud such as voter suppression to such an extreme or unprecedented scale. Also, Musk buying votes in swing states like Pennsylvania was totally illegal, but I highly doubt that was nearly enough to swing the election to Trump. It's absolutely disgusting and infuriating that Musk and other right-wingers and right-wing outlets such as Dan Bongino, Candace Owens, the Daily Wire, Alex Jones, and Fox News keep getting away with rotting people's minds but unfortunately none of that is illegal.

I get how angry some of you guys are about Biden for trying to run for re-election. Tragically, he is and will continue to be blamed for paving the way for Trump's return to power. Obviously, a big part of why Biden wanted to run for re-election was because of his ego. However, I don't think that Biden was being extremely selfish firmly believed that it was because Biden really thought that he was the country's best shot of defeating Trumpism once and for all given that he was the only person ever who ever defeated Trump before. I really thought that he could've defeated Trump had his party united behind him. He was the incumbent president and incumbency advantage and if you look at historical precedent incumbency has always been a tremendous advantage, especially for the POTUS. Also, the rest of Democratic leadership including Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries, etc. should accept their real share of the responsibility for their party's loss in 2024. They too are also at fault for ruining it all. In any case, what about how extraordinarily well he governed the country as president?

Since around the early 2000s, most rural Americans have usually voted against their own economic interests by voting Republican in elections. This voting behavior may be influenced by various factors, including the pervasive presence of right-wing propaganda. But rural America used to be largely populist, with voters supporting progressive candidates who advocated for farmers' rights and labor reform. The Democratic Party's New Deal policies, implemented during the Great Depression, resonated strongly with rural voters, who benefited from programs like the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the Rural Electrification Administration. Why do you think that is in your opinion? Is it because Democratic Party has become increasingly too socially liberal and too culturally diverse for them since the late 1900s? Is it because of how increasingly polarized the media landscape has gotten? Is it because of the significant decline of union membership in the US since the 1970s and 1980s among rural Americans, which has caused many to lose their sense of community and shared identity, and have driven them to join conservative groups such as gun clubs, Turning Point USA, evangelical church groups, and right-wing online outlets? Is it because they fear that anymore liberal/progressive economic reforms will also help out racial/ethnic minorities, immigrants, poor people in urban areas, people who aren’t Christian, and so on? Is it because the Democratic Party stopped reaching to most rural Americans for too long?

Here's a take from Dan Pfieffer on Democracy Docket on why more rural states have gotten so red:

Mr. Locario, who is black, said that when he went to Brazil that they were very forward with him.

Yeah, that's what I think it is. Though I wonder why women there are more sexually liberated in a country that's less developed and therefore more tradition-oriented than America is.

It's not just MAGA republicans. It's also the more Reagan-type Republicans who have no idea how much their policies or ideas are hated by most Americans and who have this fantasy about their party one day going back to being like that of Reagan. Don't they ever realize why the Republican party has never once won a supermajority of Republicans in either chamber of Congress since around the days of Teddy Roosevelt presidency in the 1900s decade whereas the Democrats have had supermajorities in either or both chambers of Congress a number of times since 1900? Also, moderate Democrats have to stop playing whiffle ball and play a lot more hardball.

Huh? I don't understand what you're saying. Also, I haven't had to give any money or get them something else like a green card.

Then again, has anyone noticed how conservatives and MAGA keep getting very shocked by a lot of the center-left victories we have had in the past? Even though the Left and Dems lost in 2024, the Republican party lost an extraordinary amount of big elections from 2017 to 2023. They were supposed to win the 2022 midterms when the Democratic party did uniquely well. Also, since 2022, Democrats have kept growing their power significantly at the state and local levels of government. Conservatives are just as delusional as liberals are in their own way. They are less developed overall, they are still stuck in fantasies of wanting to bring back the "good old days" that will never come back because they will never work again. Centrists/moderates are perhaps the most ground or pragmatic compared to staunch liberals and staunch conservatives. However, even moderates can really be more delusional about certain things than left-wingers and right-wingers are. For instance, moderates like Manchin and Sinema were so delusional, even more so than Biden himself was about being able to bring the country back together through bipartisanship. They eventually had to admit that the old days of great bipartisanship are gone. Moderates tend to be more spineless. Look at what happened with Merrick Garland and how he fucked up his prosecution of Trump by waiting too long all because he was too afraid of being deemed too partisan if he went ahead with the matter much faster and much earlier than he and his team did. Moderates get easily taken advantage of from less moderate people.