ah, fair enough




+ some kind of gdn climate plan (which actually polls insanely well vs the zero play it gets in the media etc)

throw in legal weed and criminal justice & electoral reform and that's prob a good start

oh, and some klind of ubi


what am i forgetting?
(tax cuts always play well of course, but you can prob skip that in lieu of increased services, could probably do a little reforming there though)

i made a meme for you guys

It's a little odd that tactically, the two front runners (Harris and the Klobb) don't provide much of a geographical advantage, and don't poll super strongly either. Harris would seem almost toxic in this spot given Biden's already strong edge among black voters. At least Abrams would presumably do well in GA, which is likely in play this time around.

Not sure there's really a stand out replacement among the obvious choices, but there doesn't seem like there's a surefire, lead pipe lock in terms of fit here.

HILLARY

Warren was also a front-runner at one point and also does fit the geographical conundrum. That said I think she's 2nd only because the narrative of her still being in the race when Death to Democracy Monday happened means she could have been offered the V.P. spot as well...but she probably shot herself in the foot long before that point.

As for anybody else I think Abrams very recently got the subtle it's not you but thanks for trying nod a couple of days ago. I don't know enough about Whitmer outside of recent events in MI but geographically speaking that would be a interesting play.

gawd how can anyone actually like Kamala? do you know anything about her? shes basically a Republican.

this feels like progress. im gonna declare victory

Sorry, you glossed over the part linking the 9/11 attacks to Iraq while talking about the UN weapons inspector being a sexual deviant, can you give me a refresh?

Ah sorry; I was afraid you meant “incopacited’ but idk how to get numbers for that. But I continue to think nominating a fossil who’s actually running on, “I’m too old to go another term” was a BRILLIANT STRATEGEM!!!

https://www.theonion.com/this-war-wi...and-1819594296

I want Harris even more now that she has the Victor seal of disapproval, that's a proven winner then!

So it was only Trump who didn't see the pandemic affecting the country like it did? I doubt you could find many moderates that thought the economy wasn't anything but great at the time, if they did you would have seen sell-offs.

I was prepared to go at you but this is a pretty fair list. I think you're laying it on pretty thick though with respect to most moderates being such idealists, but I'll concede possibly being wrong there. IMO, those in the center care about all those things unless it interferes with their ability to provide their families with a better life..

My question now is, where on there is being worried about national security? Or better yet, where does distancing themselves from the Iraq debacle lie on their list of important topics? The crime bill is similar--I don't think most moderates blame Biden for his vote at all. Had the VAWA not been part of it maybe, but that was a monumental step for women in this country.

Do you see how Bernie and his supporters attacking Biden on this fall on deaf ears to people in the middle? When you tell a moderate that Biden voted to kill thousands of people and incarcerate minorities at an alarming rate, their answer is "it's not that simple, I know more about this than you do". How does that compel those in the center?

I did, as did most of America at the time. It was there right in front of our faces, but a lot of us chose to ignore it because we were hurting and a president that the country really trusted said that Saddam was a threat to National Security. It looks really foolish now, but it didn't then to most of America.

There is a decently large subset of people on social media who are threatening to not vote if it's Klobs or Warren, who have done very little for minorities overall. Not sure how that plays into all this, but it appears as though Joe is having smart people make this decision for him.

Senate seats probably don't play a role, but there is a chance the interim replacement for EW would be an R (I've seen reports saying this is and isn't going to happen).

Dood, wtf are you talking about? Everyone knew the Iraq war was complete BS.

Hey, just because you had the largest protests in history...

There were multiple protests of over a million people iirc.
Everyone with a brain knew it had nothing to do with national security. Its why basically no other nations joined in and you guys ate freedom fries for a year.

Seadood, you have to separate the economy and stocks mentally. The US economy is bad. Stocks are fine because it is a vehicle for the rich.

Pelosi granting lobbyist's access to aid package: silence
Pelosi subsidizing health insurance companies instead of expanding Medicaid: silence
Pelosi calling Trump obese: YAS QWEEN

Seadood agrees with this as do all the other good liberals, he’s talking about his perception of the centrists’s (which is sometimes not his) perception of how things are. It’s not about what he actually thinks about anything it’s about what he thinks some people are saying.

The bottom line for the bros is that we need to vote according to whether centrist guy cares about incarcerating minorities or killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people not whether we care. It’s a big tent full of people who are for, against and indifferent to giving healthcare to poors. Voting for the right sleeper agent for change takes elite strategy.

If you can find me a poll where <50% of the American population approved of going to Iraq at the time, I'd love to see it. That's not how I remembered it, and when I went back to check the stats seemed to back it up. In Victor's mind, <50% equates to "everyone" and >50% equaling most is "wtf are you talking about"?

I never mentioned stocks though, that was Adhoc. Your idea that stocks are fine because it's a vehicle for the rich is only partly true though. There are many reasons as to why this is happening, but that's the one that grabs the headlines. Here's one that doesn't: the pandemic has helped a large portion of the middle class financially!

But that's not the point, I was talking about how things looked in February. The market is part of it, but so were homeowner rates, unemployment, and too many other factors to list. My example was exclusively talking about perception, and at the time it was quite rosy.

Not elite strategy, but common sense if progress is actually what you aim for.

Seadood,

You don’t understand the relationship between stock market/economy at all, how retail investors influence it compared to the actions of the Fed, etc. Stop embarrassing yourself.

I never mentioned stocks to begin with, and I never said retail investors didn't influence the market. Dunno how that's embarrassing myself but go ahead.

[edit] Sorry, I misread. My feel for why the market hasn't tanked is >>> "because it's a tool for the rich".

.

and? Are you saying that that moderates wouldn't be shifting their portfolios had they been fearful of a pandemic?

Approximately the same amount of Americans supported the invasion just before it occurred that believe that Aliens exist and have visited the Earth. Lots of Americans are dumb. But every person with a moral compass knew it was wrong.

Show me where I included "smart in aoFrantic's opinion" Americans in any of my examples.

That's some impressive strawmanning, I can't even hate.