🧵 Democrat Successes 🧵

[Ann]

 

[Fansince88]

On 8/14/2024 at 9:02 AM, Ann said:

 

Wow, a thinker? 

[Fansince88]

23 hours ago, Ann said:

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

What Happened to My Party?

Joel Kotkin

 

I grew up among people who worshipped the key pillars of the twentieth century Democratic Party: the New Deal, Franklin Roosevelt, and the great public works project known as New York City. The Democrats then were the party of progress—of new roads, bridges, ports, factories, and laboratories. They were also the party of national defense, a holdover from the triumph of World War II that was sustained by a fear of Communist aggression.

 

But the Democratic Party’s recent evolution contrasts sharply to its glory days. Today, the Democrats are losing out among some of the party’s core constituencies, notably those who work with their hands, Latinos, Jews, Asians, and even some African Americans. In their new configuration, the Democrats function as an electoral cabal forged by an alliance between the business elite, the professional classes, the federal bureaucracy, and dependent voters.

 

If anything, the Democrats synchronized swimming of the past month could only occur in a party largely uniform in its core constituencies and essential beliefs. They shift positions and allegiances through technology and media control, using influencers to hide troublesome past positions with a dexterity that a Communist vozdh like Joseph Stalin would have appreciated.

 

The new mindset is obvious considering the Democrats’ embrace of censorship in alliance with the tech oligarchs, who have been long-time backers of Kamala Harris, and the universities, another bulwark of progressive power. It also builds upon the assumption that the experts embraced by progressive voters should be allowed free reign since they know better than the masses.

 

The keys to understanding the increasingly authoritarian Democratic Party are threefold: class, racial politics, and sexual politics. As someone schooled in Marxist theory, I tend to place the class component first. In the past, Democrats were a party that appealed to “the little people” like factory hands, small shopkeepers, yeoman farmers, skilled mechanics, and artisans. Democrats from Kennedy to Clinton focused on private sector growth as a means to achieve upward mobility for middle- and working-class Americans.

 

But in the new Democratic policy world, most employment growth has been focused on government and public-funded health care. And the Democrats’ electoral base is largely those professionals who benefit from an expanded regulatory state.

 

MORE at the link:  https://americanmind.org/salvo/what-happed-to-my-party/

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

On 8/14/2024 at 9:02 AM, Ann said:

 

 

She's lucky.  She got let go from her government job before the loyalty tests started.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

The keys to understanding the increasingly authoritarian Democratic Party are threefold: class, racial politics, and sexual politics. As someone schooled in Marxist theory, I tend to place the class component first. In the past, Democrats were a party that appealed to “the little people” like factory hands, small shopkeepers, yeoman farmers, skilled mechanics, and artisans. Democrats from Kennedy to Clinton focused on private sector growth as a means to achieve upward mobility for middle- and working-class Americans.

 

But in the new Democratic policy world, most employment growth has been focused on government and public-funded health care. And the Democrats’ electoral base is largely those professionals who benefit from an expanded regulatory state.

 

MORE at the link:  https://americanmind.org/salvo/what-happed-to-my-party/

 

 

 

Marxism always claims to represent "the little people"...but every Marxist revolution in history has oppressed the little people and expanded the regulatory state to the benefit of the elite.

 

Just like this guy's complaining about.  The Democrats never abandoned Marxism.  They're embracing it...and ironically, this writer "schooled in Marxist thought" is abandoning them because they have.

[Ann]

4 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

What Happened to My Party?

Joel Kotkin

 

I grew up among people who worshipped the key pillars of the twentieth century Democratic Party: the New Deal, Franklin Roosevelt, and the great public works project known as New York City. The Democrats then were the party of progress—of new roads, bridges, ports, factories, and laboratories. They were also the party of national defense, a holdover from the triumph of World War II that was sustained by a fear of Communist aggression.

 

But the Democratic Party’s recent evolution contrasts sharply to its glory days. Today, the Democrats are losing out among some of the party’s core constituencies, notably those who work with their hands, Latinos, Jews, Asians, and even some African Americans. In their new configuration, the Democrats function as an electoral cabal forged by an alliance between the business elite, the professional classes, the federal bureaucracy, and dependent voters.

 

If anything, the Democrats synchronized swimming of the past month could only occur in a party largely uniform in its core constituencies and essential beliefs. They shift positions and allegiances through technology and media control, using influencers to hide troublesome past positions with a dexterity that a Communist vozdh like Joseph Stalin would have appreciated.

 

The new mindset is obvious considering the Democrats’ embrace of censorship in alliance with the tech oligarchs, who have been long-time backers of Kamala Harris, and the universities, another bulwark of progressive power. It also builds upon the assumption that the experts embraced by progressive voters should be allowed free reign since they know better than the masses.

 

The keys to understanding the increasingly authoritarian Democratic Party are threefold: class, racial politics, and sexual politics. As someone schooled in Marxist theory, I tend to place the class component first. In the past, Democrats were a party that appealed to “the little people” like factory hands, small shopkeepers, yeoman farmers, skilled mechanics, and artisans. Democrats from Kennedy to Clinton focused on private sector growth as a means to achieve upward mobility for middle- and working-class Americans.

 

But in the new Democratic policy world, most employment growth has been focused on government and public-funded health care. And the Democrats’ electoral base is largely those professionals who benefit from an expanded regulatory state.

 

MORE at the link:  https://americanmind.org/salvo/what-happed-to-my-party/

 

 

My grandfather and I had a similar discussion in 2008. He was a true-blue Dem, a union steward for his shop, etc.  

When the shenanigans was going on with Obama/Hillary/DNC in 2008, I ended one of our luncheon discussions with, "It isn't the Democratic party you knew."

He looked sad and said, "I know."

If my 90+ year-old grandfather figured that out 16 years ago, I am not sure how other long-term Democrats missed it, especially with the extremism since Obama was elected. 
 

[Boyst]

3 hours ago, Ann said:

My grandfather and I had a similar discussion in 2008. He was a true-blue Dem, a union steward for his shop, etc.  

When the shenanigans was going on with Obama/Hillary/DNC in 2008, I ended one of our luncheon discussions with, "It isn't the Democratic party you knew."

He looked sad and said, "I know."

If my 90+ year-old grandfather figured that out 16 years ago, I am not sure how other long-term Democrats missed it, especially with the extremism since Obama was elected. 
 

I would give a whole to know what my grandfather would think. Born 1914, depression era poor Southern kid who had his first job shoveling coal ashe between the rails of the nearby railroad at age 7. Hated unions but liked the worked, hated conservative economics, blamed the GOP for the problems in the South due to post war reconstruction which destroyed the Piedmont area of the Carolinas. A true Southern Democrat with that tinch of racism.

 

He loved Bill, he thought Hillary was sharp.  He passed away in 07 and never heard of Obama before he got started. That would have been fun to witness.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

4 minutes ago, Boyst said:

I would give a whole to know what my grandfather would think. Born 1914, depression era poor Southern kid who had his first job shoveling coal ashe between the rails of the nearby railroad at age 7. Hated unions but liked the worked, hated conservative economics, blamed the GOP for the problems in the South due to post war reconstruction which destroyed the Piedmont area of the Carolinas. A true Southern Democrat with that tinch of racism.

 

He loved Bill, he thought Hillary was sharp.  He passed away in 07 and never heard of Obama before he got started. That would have been fun to witness.

 

Hillary is sharp.

 

She's a conniving, manipulative bitch.  But a sharp one.

[Ann]

16 minutes ago, Boyst said:

I would give a whole to know what my grandfather would think. Born 1914, depression era poor Southern kid who had his first job shoveling coal ashe between the rails of the nearby railroad at age 7. Hated unions but liked the worked, hated conservative economics, blamed the GOP for the problems in the South due to post war reconstruction which destroyed the Piedmont area of the Carolinas. A true Southern Democrat with that tinch of racism.

 

He loved Bill, he thought Hillary was sharp.  He passed away in 07 and never heard of Obama before he got started. That would have been fun to witness.

 

My grandfather was born in 1918. His father was a coal miner (moved to Buffalo to get away from the mines). His FIL was also a coal miner (they never moved away, that great-grandfather retired a coal miner). 
 

My grandfather told us the story of how a cousin heard about the better pay down in Kentucky mines (they mined in Ohio), so went down to his great detriment. 
 

The song 16 tons? It’s real.

 

The cousin stuck in Kentucky somehow got a letter out, and the family got together to rescue him from that Kentucky coal mining town.

 

As my grandfather liked to say, “The mules were treated better than the men in the mines. The mules cost money, and so the mine owners took care of the mules. If a man got hurt or killed, they just hired someone else.”

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 minutes ago, Ann said:

 

My grandfather was born in 1918. His father was a coal miner (moved to Buffalo to get away from the mines). His FIL was also a coal miner (they never moved away, that great-grandfather retired a coal miner). 
 

My grandfather told us the story of how a cousin heard about the better pay down in Kentucky mines (they mined in Ohio), so went down to his great detriment. 
 

The song 16 tons? It’s real.

 

The cousin stuck in Kentucky somehow got a letter out, and the family got together to rescue him from that Kentucky coal mining town.

 

As my grandfather liked to say, “The mules were treated better than the men in the mines. The mules cost money, and so the mine owners took care of the mules. If a man got hurt or killed, they just hired someone else.”

 

 

 

People who think slavery ended in 1865 really need to look in to how the coal mines operated in the 1890s.  

[Boyst]

1 hour ago, Ann said:

 

My grandfather was born in 1918. His father was a coal miner (moved to Buffalo to get away from the mines). His FIL was also a coal miner (they never moved away, that great-grandfather retired a coal miner). 
 

My grandfather told us the story of how a cousin heard about the better pay down in Kentucky mines (they mined in Ohio), so went down to his great detriment. 
 

The song 16 tons? It’s real.

 

The cousin stuck in Kentucky somehow got a letter out, and the family got together to rescue him from that Kentucky coal mining town.

 

As my grandfather liked to say, “The mules were treated better than the men in the mines. The mules cost money, and so the mine owners took care of the mules. If a man got hurt or killed, they just hired someone else.”

 

 

The Piedmont region I live in now was pro union to agnostic. They had no interest in the slave trade and had little to no economic value to anyone.  There wasn't good enough soil for major crops short of some tobacco. From the Haw River maybe even as far in as the PeeDee - there weren't many people. Even the railway built across my land dating back to 1850 wasn't really used and little fighting occured this far inland... But union troops still invaded and fired houses and homes. Still took anything they could get their hands on. And, according to my grandpa and every older man I ever knew: they were as harsh on the blacks as anyone. They just straight up bullied everyone in these poor Southern communities until these communities began to fight back and send their troops off to protect their interests.

 

The war of northern aggression.

 

As time went on these Republicans kept trying to shift the goal posts and didn't give a crap about the poor people: most of the region. The race, class, education, none of it mattered. No one went to school beyond 6th grade, white or black. Most couldn't read but they could run a machine or dig a hole. They'd get paid enough money to maintain their family and not cause an uprising. The war ravaged South still recovering from just the 80's and 90's was only made worse when policies kept failing the south. My grandpa hated Taft but not Teddy... And continued to have odd choices based on logic I never understood. 

 

This entire area of Southern Democrats raised a new breed of Democrats that are passively racist, elitest snobs, and arrogantly ignorant.

 

Maybe this isn't true but it's amazing because this is the story we are all told. Maybe fact checking Calvin will weigh in and tell me how wrong everyone is...

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, Boyst said:

The Piedmont region I live in now was pro union to agnostic. They had no interest in the slave trade and had little to no economic value to anyone.  There wasn't good enough soil for major crops short of some tobacco. From the Haw River maybe even as far in as the PeeDee - there weren't many people. Even the railway built across my land dating back to 1850 wasn't really used and little fighting occured this far inland... But union troops still invaded and fired houses and homes. Still took anything they could get their hands on. And, according to my grandpa and every older man I ever knew: they were as harsh on the blacks as anyone. They just straight up bullied everyone in these poor Southern communities until these communities began to fight back and send their troops off to protect their interests.

 

The war of northern aggression.

 

As time went on these Republicans kept trying to shift the goal posts and didn't give a crap about the poor people: most of the region. The race, class, education, none of it mattered. No one went to school beyond 6th grade, white or black. Most couldn't read but they could run a machine or dig a hole. They'd get paid enough money to maintain their family and not cause an uprising. The war ravaged South still recovering from just the 80's and 90's was only made worse when policies kept failing the south. My grandpa hated Taft but not Teddy... And continued to have odd choices based on logic I never understood. 

 

This entire area of Southern Democrats raised a new breed of Democrats that are passively racist, elitest snobs, and arrogantly ignorant.

 

Maybe this isn't true but it's amazing because this is the story we are all told. Maybe fact checking Calvin will weigh in and tell me how wrong everyone is...

 

Comes across like most of the D's in this area that are roughly my age.

[Ann]

NSFW (Language)
 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

Harris: a 25% tax on unrealized capital gains.

Harris: also, a 50% tax on realized capital gains.

 

So follow the quick back-of-the-envelope math here:

 

Elon Musk has $20B in unrealized gains in a year, from Tesla stock.  Musk owes $5B on the unrealized capital gains.  Musk has to sell $5B of stock to pay for his unrealized gains...but now, that's a realized gain, taxed at 50%, so now he has an unrealized gain of $15B, and $2.5B of the $3.75B he now needs to pay his unrealized capital gains tax.  

 

Ultimately, this works out to something like a 38% unrealized capital gains tax, through the forced sale of capital assets...and the losses in retirement accounts from the hit asset valuations take from the forced sale will be more than the taxes ultimately collected. 

 

And by "retirement accounts," I'm not thinking 401ks.  I'm thinking state pensions like CALPERs, which is already 30% underfunded in no small part due to market under-performance.  The taxes collected will not come close to making up the funding shortfall of pension funds.

 

Democrats: unable to see the consequences of their actions since...well, forever.

[devnull]

10 hours ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said:

Harris: a 25% tax on unrealized capital gains.

Harris: also, a 50% tax on realized capital gains.

 

So follow the quick back-of-the-envelope math here:

 

Elon Musk has $20B in unrealized gains in a year, from Tesla stock.  Musk owes $5B on the unrealized capital gains.  Musk has to sell $5B of stock to pay for his unrealized gains...but now, that's a realized gain, taxed at 50%, so now he has an unrealized gain of $15B, and $2.5B of the $3.75B he now needs to pay his unrealized capital gains tax.  

 

Ultimately, this works out to something like a 38% unrealized capital gains tax, through the forced sale of capital assets...and the losses in retirement accounts from the hit asset valuations take from the forced sale will be more than the taxes ultimately collected. 

 

And by "retirement accounts," I'm not thinking 401ks.  I'm thinking state pensions like CALPERs, which is already 30% underfunded in no small part due to market under-performance.  The taxes collected will not come close to making up the funding shortfall of pension funds.

 

Democrats: unable to see the consequences of their actions since...well, forever.

 

Or maybe they're playing 4D chess and you're playing checkers

 

Maybe they want pension systems to falter so they have a pretext to nationalize 401k accounts

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

2 hours ago, devnull said:

 

Or maybe they're playing 4D chess and you're playing checkers

 

Maybe they want pension systems to falter so they have a pretext to nationalize 401k accounts

 

No, they're going to leverage that to create a federal investment rating system, and only allow retirement accounts to invest in government-approved vehicles.    Because giving people the illusion of choice while taking it away for their "protection" is what they do.

 

They'll also fine hedge funds and private equity funds for their "irresponsibility" in investment management, and confiscate their money to bail out state/muni pension funds like CALPERs.  

 

I play better 4D chess than they do.

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

I don't know where to put something this moronic.

 

Even in my most deranged efforts of "What's the stupidest things Democrats could do" thinking, I never would have had "Queering nuclear weapons" on my bingo card. 

 

https://www.abc3340.com/news/nation-world/biden-harris-official-called-for-queering-nuclear-weapons-in-2023-article-sneha-nair-dei-national-nuclear-security-administration-lgbt-policy-department-of-energy-kamala-joe-election

 

Quote

Sneha Nair joined the department in February as a special assistant in the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Included in her body of work is an article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists titled "Queering nuclear weapons: How LGBTQ+ inclusion strengthens security and reshapes disarmament."

 

Link to paper.  I couldn't have written this as a joke.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Hedge]