Yeah, unfortunately I think it's more likely to see the Dems thread the needle and go "Of course, domestically, we're against everything the Trump administration is doing; but even we have to admit it's
admirablethe support he's showing our Israeli allies."I'd love to be wrong about this, but...
I've gotten a couple of my "Vote Kamala or we all die!" Aquaintances to admit that throwing Palestinians under the bus was a shit move that didn't buy them any votes
The trick is to approach them like a lost dog, offer them a treat and speak with a calm, soothing voice while maintaining a firm, yet authoritative posture
oh, regular people can come around on this for sure
when I say Dems I mean the representatives and party leadership.
Oh yeah, they can fuck off
Won't learn anything because they don't want to
The question is, can we get enough of these regular people to come around to the idea that the Dem party leadership is their fucking enemy?
Holding out a copy of State and Revolution with a pod jon taped over the picture of Lenin
yeah this'll be the we're reaching across the aisle thing, as the republicans give nothing in return
Whats insane is that they want to mass deport hispanic trump voters and their family members, so they cant even say it in good faith.
Not all of them. The extremely online jackasses aren't the whole population and probably arent' representative of all Dems.
Like the freaks we interact with on Reddit, Bsky, and Hellsite are freaks, extra
turbo-libs who have nothing better to do than pretend they're part of the neoliberal consensus and not peons like the rest of us.
This is one thing I miss from the first Trump presidency, you could actually have a conversation with liberals about all the problems with the US and all the problems the US was causing globally, and they would sometimes be inclined to listen because Trump was at the helm. Then, after Biden won, they completely hunkered down and were all "What do you mean, our guy is in the White House, everything is perfect, shut up you lunatic leftie".
Okay since this is about the 1000th time i see this picture or a version of it: who is this (not Eli, the guy on the picture)
It's an old Norman Rockwell painting titled (I shit you not) "American Freedom"
Its actually got an even cringier name: "Freedom of Speech" and the subject is a real guy who was opposed to...building a new school in his town
opposed to...building a new school in his town
Was it because of racism?
Goddamn we're cynical
Freedom of Speech depicts a scene of a 1942 Arlington town meeting in which Jim Edgerton, the lone dissenter to the town selectmen's announced plans to build a new school, as the old one had burned down,[9] was accorded the floor as a matter of protocol.[10] Edgerton supported the rebuilding process but was concerned about the tax burden of the proposal, as his family farm had been ravaged by disease
Something to keep in mind was this was still essentially the depression, so a farmer saying "I can't afford the taxes to build a new school" might actually be true
It probably wasn't racism cuz let's be real, Vermont on 1940 was 99.9% white. I'm not making that up, I just checked the census records
Show
During FDR's presidency in the lead up to WWII, he made the "Four Freedoms" speech, which the artist Norman Rockwell illustrated in four different paintings. This one, "freedom of speech" is the most well known/reproduced.
Source: I was a high school us history teacher
There's no propaganda in America, though.
It's wild how American's fetishize freedom of speech when the only thing speech is good for is influencing power, and
definitely does not do that.The nicest practical aspect of free speech is you mostly don't have to self-censor every communication, mostly.
I didn't think this was possible but Eli is giving his subjects way too much credit.
Liberals are currently trying to figure out how to do ethnic cleaning so they can try to deport everybody related to a grump voter.
Give htem a month or two, they'll always have been against it then.
