hey yall, popping in from my hexbear break to share this map thingy the psl is doing. yes its a big doxing map but you dont have to use your real name or info, it would just be super cool to fill this out and get a map full of moving blurbs about why people want socialism. and if you dont wanna fill it out I thought some of yall would enjoy reading it, some of the statements are very moving.

linky

I saw #Recount2024 trending and ... yeah. Blue MAGA everyone.

Not a lib

So basically they increased they federal minimum wage for salary employees. By a LOT. This is a huge huge increase for a lot of people. And it is recalculated for further automatic increases every 3 years. I personally know people who will benefit massively from this.

And yet I never heard about it. I would actually give a point to the Biden administration for this...it's a good and meaningful, if small, systemic change. I asked the turbolibs in my life about it....they didn't know. I asked folks who are going to be receiving this increase...they didn't know why they were getting it. Some of them didn't even know they were getting it. They just thought their boss was being nice. A few didn't know they were getting it at all and will probably just be surprised when suddenly their paycheck is bigger.

Like how are you not leading with stuff like this? Hey millions of Americans who wants a $10,000 plus raise automatically? It doesn't impact hourly employees so it still leaves a lot of the working class out, but many many working class people are salaried and below this threshold and will benefit a lot from this. How is this not plastered on every billboard? "Dear America look how much of a raise we got you."

They didn't want to win on the economy. If they did they would have led with things like this. They wanted to win on their thirst for blood. I think the fact that nobody knew about this change is compelling evidence enough.

HOW CAN ANYONE BE THIS DAFT

>https://archive.is/lbWKO By Michael C. Bender Nov. 11, 2024Updated 3:17 p.m. ET

Voters in liberal strongholds across the country, from city centers to suburban stretches, failed to show up to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris at the levels they had for Joseph R. Biden Jr. four years earlier, contributing significantly to her defeat by Donald J. Trump, according to a New York Times analysis of preliminary election data.

The numbers help fill in the picture of Mr. Trump’s commanding victory, showing it may not represent the resounding endorsement of his agenda that the final Electoral College vote suggests. Mr. Trump won the White House not only because he turned out his supporters and persuaded skeptics, but also because many Democrats sat this election out, presumably turned off by both candidates.

Counties with the biggest Democratic victories in 2020 delivered 1.9 million fewer votes for Ms. Harris than they had for Mr. Biden. The nation’s most Republican-heavy counties turned out an additional 1.2 million votes for Mr. Trump this year, according to the analysis of the 47 states where the vote count is largely complete.

The drop-off spanned demographics and economics. It was clear in counties with the highest job growth rates, counties with the most job losses and counties with the highest percentage of college-educated voters. Turnout was down, too, across groups that are traditionally strong for Democrats — including areas with large numbers of Black Christians and Jewish voters.

The decline in key cities, including Detroit and Philadelphia, made it exceptionally difficult for Ms. Harris to win the battlegrounds of Michigan and Pennsylvania.

The drop-off is an extraordinary shift for Democrats, who, motivated by Mr. Trump’s surprise victory in 2016, had turned out in eye-popping numbers for the three subsequent elections. They clipped his power in Washington in 2018, removed him from office in 2020 and defeated many of his handpicked candidates for battleground races in 2022.

Democrats said they need a new way to re-engage voters who are fatigued by the anti-Trump message and distrustful of both parties.

The reasons behind the drop-off are varied. For one, some backsliding could be expected after the record turnout in 2020, which was aided by pandemic rule changes that increased mail voting.

Some analysts point out that Ms. Harris was simply the latest political casualty of a postpandemic global trend favoring challengers, no matter the incumbents’ politics, in places like Japan, South Africa, South Korea and Britain.

But narrow results in swing states indicate that Democrats had an opportunity to turn back Mr. Trump once again. Some party officials said Ms. Harris did not have enough time to overhaul the campaign after taking over for Mr. Biden, whose popularity has plunged since his 2020 win.

Others were more critical of her messaging, suggesting the campaign was chasing ghosts in trying to appeal to Republican crossover voters by campaigning with conservatives like Liz Cheney and talking about threats to democracy. Instead, these people said, the Harris campaign should have spent more time talking about how her economic policies would affect an important, but disaffected, part of her party.

Structural differences between the Republican and Democratic operations may have played a role, too. The Harris campaign, flush with cash, relied on a traditional turnout program that stationed field staff members in campaign offices across the battleground map. To some degree, the data suggest that program worked; Ms. Harris won more voters than Mr. Biden in four of the six battleground states where the count is nearly complete. But that increase was swamped by Mr. Trump’s gains.

The former president seized on new federal election rulings that, for the first time, let campaigns directly coordinate with outside groups focused on pushing voters to the polls. Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, poured $175 million into canvassers for America PAC, whose team effectively took its marching orders from the Trump campaign. Editors’ Picks A Union Square Date Night for Inter-Borough Relationships Don’t Say ‘Macbeth’ and Other Strange Rituals of the Theater World Are Seed Oils Actually Bad for You?

“It’s really a question of playbooks,” said Donna Brazile, the former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. “Trump had edgier and stronger material that he was constantly communicating at rallies, on podcasts and in other appearances. Democrats tried to compete in seven battleground states and call it a day.”

In Pennsylvania, the biggest electoral prize on the battleground map, Mr. Trump’s victory received an outsize boost from an unlikely place — the five counties with the highest percentage of registered Democrats: Allegheny, Delaware, Lackawanna, Montgomery and Philadelphia.

Ms. Harris won these counties, but not by the margins needed to overcome Republican-heavy areas of the state. Total turnout was down from 2020 in all five Democratic strongholds, which could partly explain how Ms. Harris received 78,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump added 24,000 votes to his total in these same counties.

This gap left Ms. Harris with little chance of winning Pennsylvania. Mr. Trump’s victory margin in the state, as of Sunday, was about 145,000 votes.

In Wisconsin, the voter participation rate overall was among the highest of any state. But voters in Democratic-heavy counties simply could not keep pace with gains from their Republican counterparts.

In the eight counties that include Milwaukee, Madison and the surrounding suburbs, Ms. Harris surpassed the Biden totals by about 20,000 votes. But Mr. Trump gained about the same. In the rest of Wisconsin, Democrats were drubbed.

In Michigan, Mr. Trump’s victory was mainly a result of the drop-off in Wayne County, home to Detroit and diverse suburbs like Dearborn and Hamtramck that supply the state with its most significant source of Democratic votes.

While Ms. Harris easily won Wayne County, she did it with 61,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden had, a decline of about 10 percent, while Mr. Trump added 24,000 votes, a jump of about 9 percent.

That swing limited Ms. Harris’s hopes of winning Michigan, where Mr. Trump was ahead by about 81,000 votes.

Branden Snyder, a liberal organizer in Detroit, said he had conversations with other activists in the final weeks of the race about how strange they thought it was for Ms. Harris to bring Ms. Cheney, a former Republican House member from Wyoming, on the campaign trail in Detroit. Many progressive voters in the city viewed Ms. Harris as a centrist, he said, and they may have been better served hearing from a fellow liberal who could explain why they should be excited to support the vice president.

He said he vividly recalled realizing that Democrats were in trouble during the final weekend of the race when he was knocking on doors on the east side of Detroit and he could not find a way to persuade a middle-aged Black woman to cast her ballot. Black women have long been some of the Democratic Party’s most reliable voters.

“When you have Black women not voting because they say nothing is going to happen — that neither candidate is going to change anything — that is doomsday for Democrats,” Mr. Snyder said. A Nationwide Trend

The warning bells are ringing for Democrats well beyond the battlegrounds. Ms. Harris won fewer votes than Mr. Biden in 36 of 47 states. (Results remained incomplete on Sunday in Alaska, Arizona and California.)

In predominantly urban counties nationwide where most votes had been counted, Ms. Harris received two million fewer votes than Mr. Biden had four years earlier. Overall votes in these counties were down by about 1.7 million.

The trend was especially striking in Cook County, Ill., home to Chicago, the nation’s third-largest city. Overall turnout there was down by 20 percent. Mr. Trump collected about his same 2020 total vote, but Ms. Harris’s total was more than 417,000 votes behind Mr. Biden’s.

In the nation’s suburbs, however, there was clearer evidence that Mr. Trump had successfully persuaded Biden voters to flip. Turnout in predominantly suburban counties held steady from 2020, but Ms. Harris drew about 940,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden, while Mr. Trump added 1.3 million votes.

In counties where at least 40 percent of white adults hold a college degree, total turnout declined by about 230,000 votes, or 3 percent, from 2020. Ms. Harris won 271,000 fewer votes in such places, while Mr. Trump added 61,000.

In Texas, the party’s decade-long dream of turning it blue suffered a significant setback. While total turnout was about the same as four years ago, Ms. Harris won about 450,000 fewer votes than Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump enhanced his margin by 485,000 votes.

In New Jersey, where Democratic presidential candidates typically win by about 15 percentage points, Ms. Harris won by just five points. It was the narrowest margin in more than three decades, when then-Gov. Bill Clinton of Arkansas outlasted President George H.W. Bush by two percentage points.

This year in New Jersey, total turnout was down by about 442,000 votes, just shy of the decline of 475,000 votes for Ms. Harris from Mr. Biden.

Mr. Trump, once again, made gains despite a decrease in turnout, lifting his total in the state by 26,000 votes.

!what-the-hell

roughly my face reading some quotes here. There is truly well of unbound optimism and naivety in americans

archive link

> Another Democratic operative close to Harrisworld says they sent memos and data to Harris campaign staffers underscoring how, among other things, Republican voters, believe it or not, vote Republican — and that the data over the past year screamed that Democrats instead needed to reassure and energize the liberal base and Dem-leaning working class in battleground states. “We were told, basically, to get lost, no thank you,” says the operative.

lmao

>Amid Democratic mourning over the loss of the presidential election to Donald Trump, the party chair risked deepening already growing divisions by rebuking the leftwing Vermont senator Bernie Sanders for saying Democrats have “abandoned working class people”. > >“This is straight up BS,” Jaime Harrison, the Democratic National Committee chair, said on Thursday. “[Joe] Biden was the most pro-worker president of my lifetime – saved union pensions, created millions of good paying jobs and even marched in a picket line.” > >Harrison also defended Kamala Harris, the vice-president who lost the election to Trump, for proposing policies that “would have fundamentally transformed the quality of life and closed the racial wealth gap for working people across this country”. > >He said: “From the child tax credits, to [$]25k for a down payment for a house to Medicare covering the cost of senior healthcare in their homes. There are a lot of post-election takes and this one ain’t a good one.”

this person does an inverse !maybe-later-kiddo

Kamala hasn’t picked up her phone since Tuesday.

>The top reasons voters gave for not supporting Harris were that inflation was too high (+24), too many immigrants crossed the border (+23), and that Harris was too focused on cultural issues rather than helping the middle class (+17).

>Other high-testing reasons were that the debt rose too much under the Biden-Harris Administration (+13), and that Harris would be too similar to Joe Biden (+12).

>These concerns were similar across all demographic groups, including among Black and Latino voters, who both selected inflation as their top problem with Harris. For swing voters who eventually chose Trump, cultural issues ranked slightly higher than inflation (+28 and +23, respectively).

>The lowest-ranked concerns were that Harris wasn’t similar enough to Biden (-24), was too conservative (-23), and was too pro-Israel (-22).

We have a lot of work to do. The general public doesn't understand their own economic system and blames everyone except Capitalists for their eggs costing $5 instead of $2.

Also those numbers around "Israel" and Palestine... !yikes

74,263,792 at current count, last election he got 74,223,975. So about 40,000 more. Relatively minuscule, but still an achievement for him

linky !who-did-this

Bernie 2016 was a much better campaign than 2020 because of one reason. Bernie personally hated Hillary, didn't rate Hillary, and not Hillary's friend. The 2016 campaign against Hillary had much more artillery and venom than the 2020 campaign against Biden. Bernie has always been Joe Biden's friend when they were at the Senate.

We all maligned the collusion and consolidation of power that happened before Super Tuesday 2020 - but that was really pertaining to Klobuchar and Mayo Pete dropping out, two third rate politicians. The race was not over then. After it was a 1v1 race, Bernie REFUSES to attack Biden like he attacked Hillary. Biden is as much of a corporate sellout as Hillary. Bernie could've attacked Biden's cognitive decline, which was clear even back in 2020. He could've attacked Biden corrupt family dealing. I was a volunteer canvasser in 2016 and 2020, I knocked thousands of doors for Bernie in NH and MA, it was incredibly frustrating that Bernie wouldn't make a case against Biden like he did against Hillary. That's why Bernie 2020 sucked.

Bernie rolled over, and joined Democrat leadership in Biden administration, essentially extinguished the populist left wing and ceding the populist working class movement to the right. And here we are, Trump is 47th, because Bernie refused to attack "my friend Joe".

Now Bernard had the balls to blame the Democratic party for abandoning the working class, dude you abandoned your volunteers and campaign for your friend Joe.

!oooaaaaaaauhhh

How many emails will it take to get "Russia!"... three

> We don't know yet but fraud is on the table. There was so much Russian interference and free-fall for them on X and then with America PAC, which should have been a GOTV campaign but turned into a paying people off for votes until (?) the justice department warned Musk. But they went undercover or just stopped?

>Voters made a statement but until we have a full security overview of this election, we won't know if it's the people's will or the will of foreign adversaries.

There's some sanity in the thread:

>I would caution against the message or notion that there was a material impact of foreign efforts until more is known. It robs Trump voters of their agency, ignores their real fears about cost of living and social issues, and wasn't an effective message last time.

>There was a great quote I read from post 2016 done by some deep research, I can't remember who wrote it and I'm paraphrasing as I heard it at a lecture in 2017: "Trump voters have a sense they've been waiting in line their entire lives for a slice of the American dream, and they're not where they thought they'd be in life. They feel like they're working hard, playing by the rules, and they're owed something by society. They see progressive policies as giving benefits to other people, which effectively is allowing them to cut in line, and get access to the American dream they don't have. They want those policies to stop, and they're willing to blow up the system to make it happen."

Lots of women in the thread think it all boils down to sexism. "Kamala lost because she's a woman."

CW: SA

spoiler

>Bingo — men secretly, and not so secretly, hate women being in ANY kind of leadership position or exercising ANY kind of autonomy. It’s threatening — fires up the lizard brain. And lizard brain is where bad shit happens.

>This hate either manifests itself overtly, for example, via the emails I received as a Kamala staffer: “FUCK YOU YOU STUPID WHORE I HOPE YOU GETremovedD WITH KNIVES YOU FUCKING CUM BUCKET BITCH” — I got so many of these, and sent from real email accounts — WORK EMAIL ACCOUNTS — at SCHOOLS!

>Or, the more sinister manifestation: “I just don’t know her policies” “Have you googled to find them or gone to the website?” “No.” If Kamala were a man, he would have automatically been granted a minimal respect just for being a dude. A confident woman? Hmm, something’s not right here.

---

Then there's stuff like this:

>Early exit polling data suggests that Joe Biden received a higher share of the women’s vote than both Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton did in their respective presidential runs, by at least 3 percentage points.

>More broadly, the party’s persistent push to shift rightward has not proven to be a winning strategy. The Democratic base is energized by BOLD, progressive policies, not by chasing endorsements from neocon, right-wing, warhawks like Dick Cheney. This drive to appeal to a “center” often ignores that many independent voters aren’t inherently centrists. They’re driven by issues that demand clear positions, not ideological compromise.

>This was a challenging election cycle for Democrats, partly because they didn’t hold a primary to choose the strongest candidate. The Democratic Party needs to return to its principles and embrace a true primary process, so that the most popular candidates emerge, rather than consolidating against enormously popular candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren

---

Are the libs learning? Welcome to another look inside Lib Land. Anything specific you want me to share?

I'll go first:

• Libs will suddenly discover that there's concentration camps in Gaza. This will lead to one protest with cheeky signs.
• Someone assassinates a prominent politician (not Trump)
• McDonalds' releases a new burger, which Trump tweets about.
• John Bolton releases a new book.
• Trump inflames tensions with Indonesia or Mauritania, suddenly everyone is a geopolitical expert
• Trump pledges to give more weapons to Ukraine after meeting Zelensky. Stops all support after meeting Putin, pretends not to have made the previous pledge.
• Trump will do a minor goof which libs will bring up for the next four years. His supporters will carry around comfort blankets to show support

lmao

I mean jesus christ there was a slight dip in turnout for the MAGA people but 15 million dropped off the face of the planet for the Dems from 2020. That's gotta be fucking historic. I do hope this will be a radicalising moment for a lot of well-intentioned liberals.

They fumbled 4 states that Biden flipped, and Trump came pretty fucking close to flipping NY. If this doesn't awaken people to the political dead end that is the Democratic party I don't know what will.

Why she deserved to lose: Gaza genocide

Why she actually lost: voters inappropriately blaming democrats for the high inflation in 2021-2023

• (it wasn't really Biden's fault or the democrats' fault, it was a global issue and pretty much every country has dealt with high inflation in the last few years. The US's inflation has been about average internationally, maybe even a bit lower than average.)

Why this sucks:

• since Gaza protest voters weren't actually a difference maker, there's not as much opportunity for us to agitate about it as we would've liked. Liberals will probably be dismissive of the argument that Harris lost because of her position about Gaza, and they'll be right; it just doesn't really hold up.
• the liberal smugness about ignorant voters that we're surely going to see in the next few weeks is... actually kind of correct.

Let me know if you think I'm wrong about any of this. I'd kind of like to be wrong, honestly.

Or at least all the candidates counted with the dataset I could find

You (libs) screwed up

• First you all colluded and cheated Bernie out of 2020 primary
• You elected a figurehead and you colluded to hide his cognitive decline before your eyes
• By sheer luck you somehow won 2020 because of once in a century pandemic, this victory was paid by thousands of lives lost
• You did nothing to help the people while you are in power
• You rigged the 2024 primary and squashed all legitimate criticisms from your own base
• You are complicit in funding a genocide of innocent men, women, and children, and denying victims of genocide of their humanity
• When the cognitive decline was too obvious, you circumvented the democratic process and replaced your old and decrepit figurehead with another airhead
• You run a zero substance campaign
• You raised a billion dollar and burned it to ashes
• You campaigned with Liz Cheney in Michigan
• Finally, your campaign was cringe AF. Dark Brandon, JOY, Kamalamentum, Kamalanomics, Kamalanomenon

Captain America is here with the itemized receipt

!

!ecoterrorism

In every election, there are those who go to the polls but abstain from voting. This is a fact that might shock some liberals. The very idea that not only would someone stand in line to vote, but would do so only to cast no vote at all, and instead submit a blank ballot, likely does not compute for them. Let's explore this phenomenon a little, shall we?

A blank ballot, or blank vote, is what is known as an "undervote". Undervotes, however, also include voting technology errors. The 2000 presidential election is notorious for its voting technology issues. Some might remember the news going on and on about the "Hanging Chads", eventually leading to the Supreme Court halting the recount of ballots in Florida, leading to the upset win for G.W. Bush. Undervotes are part of a calculation that is known as the "Residual Vote", which is determined by the undervotes (blanks) and overvotes (e.g. voting for both candidates for president on the same ballet, sometimes caused by ink smudges or ruined ballots). From 2000 to 2004 you can see a massive drop-off in the national Residual Vote Rate, which was due to a change in voting technology driven by the hanging chads in Florida.

!

In the 1970s, following Watergate, Nevada added a new option to their ballot called "none of these candidates." It is the only state in the union that allows its electorate to voice their dissatisfaction with the candidates in an official capacity. The result of this policy means that Nevada has one of the lowest Residual Vote Rates in the country, and is the only state where you can see a clear error rate with the voting technology, and tabulate a true abstain vote.

!

As you can see, in 2016, the undervote sits at almost 0% and the "none" vote sits at just around 2%. In the 2020 elections, "none" received 14,079 votes, putting it at just about 1%. Thus far, in this election (2024) "None" has received 1.2% of the vote.

When you look at the "None" results and compare them between 2016 and 2020 in Nevada, and then do a similar comparison between the Residual Vote Rate for other states, you notice something interesting.

Nevada "None" vote as % of Total Vote. 2016 | 2.564722295 2020 | 1.001795961

A % change of ~39%. Meaning, the number of people who voted "None" went down in 2020, this was while the total number of votes went up in 2020 by almost 80% in Nevada.

California "RVR" as % of Total Vote. 2016 | 2.55 2020 | 1.6

Michigan "RVR" as % of Total Vote. 2016 | 1.03 2020 | 0.63

Wisconsin "RVR" as % of Total Vote. 2016 | 0.93 2020 | 0.35

New York "RVR" as % of Total Vote. 2016 | 1.03 2020 | 0.58

Nearly very single state with data, according to elections.mit.edu, had their RVR drop by a significant amount. You can pull the site up and see a similar change but in the other direction by comparing the RVR between the 2012 and 2016 elections. There was a higher RVR in 2016 than there was in 2012.

What does this tell us exactly? Well, when you consider that Nevada's true RVR has been dropping significantly over the decades, it's a pretty clear indication that the error rate on voting technology for in-person voting has been getting better and better. Nevada is consistently one of the states with the lowest RVR due to its ability to separate out the protest votes from the errors.

If Nevada's RVR is assumed to be as close to what the average TRUE RVR is given current voting technology, we can also assume then that a portion of the votes seen as RVR in other states can be assumed to be protest votes.

I predict that this year you are going to see a rise in the national RVR. Combine a rise in the RVR, with a low voter turn out, a rise in 3rd party voting, and very little voter conversions for either party, it should be clear to anyone looking at this data that the reason Harris lost this time around is that she did not excite the electorate enough to turn out and vote, or enraged a portion of them to abstain.

Ask any Liberal to explain to you why someone might stand in line at a polling both only to cast a ballot without filling in the presidential candidate intentionally, and what that means for this election, and electoralism generally, and watch them flop about like a fish out of water.

Sources:

• https://medium.com/mit-election-lab/whats-a-residual-vote-and-what-s-it-doing-in-the-elections-performance-index-e455289acb30
• https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map
• MIT Election Data and Science Lab, 2017, "U.S. President 1976–2020", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/42MVDX, Harvard Dataverse, V8

Assuming they simply didn't vote in the general election, that's enough votes to have flipped both of those states.

It turns out genocide is unpopular enough to sway elections.

source

I'm one of the unreasonable socialists that controls who gets elected president in every cycle. As you have probably noticed by now, I have decided not to allow Kamala to win the presidency. The reasons are mainly these:

• I hate Dick Cheney. I think I hate him more than any other person on the planet. In times of depression, I have literally thought to myself that if I just stay alive for long enough, Dick Cheney will eventually die, and I will get to live on a planet that doesn't have Dick Cheney on it. You liberals used to hate him too. You used to compare him to Darth Vader, apparently a character from movie series for children. But you seem to have forgotten and now you like him. I still find it extremely off-putting to associate with Dick Cheney, and I am still eagerly waiting for him to die.
• I support Hezbollah. Contrary to what you probably think, Hezbollah is considered a legitimate sociopolitical organization by the vast majority of this planet's population. The US and its closest allies have labeled it a terrorist organization. Here is the former president of Lebanon, a Christian and secular man who served in Lebanon's official legitimate military (states are allow to have them 🤷🏻‍♂️), memorializing his friend Nasrallah on twitter. Hezbollah formed in response to Israel illegally occupying portions of southern Lebanon from the early 1980s to 2000. Ronald Reagan called it a holocaust against the Lebanese people. Israel continues to use white phosphorus, a war crime, on Southern Lebanon civilians. Hezbollah and Nasrallah fought against ISIS in Syria. Assassinating people like Nasrallah and blowing up people's pagers is literally terrorism.
• This explosive pager thing is probably more fucked up than you are thinking about. Are you sure you don't have any electronics in your pocket right now that include components from Israel? Are you sure Netanyahu couldn't blow you up right now? Or even just blow up from a software glitch? Do you want to live in that world? Every nation has a responsibility to its citizens to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel now.
• I support Hamas. You are siding with the people running the concentration camps. You are siding with ethnic cleansers. Palestinians are literally living within designated fenced-in areas. They do not control who or what is allowed to move through the fence. Israel keeps them economically isolated. They are drinking toxic water and starving, and due to low life expectancy, the average Gazan is an unemployed teenager. When Palestinians resist this violently, they get bombed. When Palestinians resist this peacefully, they get shot. This happened in 2019 when they organized a peaceful protest and IDF shot at them, and you never knew or cared. Now they are getting bombed and polling shows that you know and you care and you want it to stop, but you still think a party that is committed to supplying the bombs should be running the world. So I don't know how you expect Palestinians to behave.
• In the last month, Trump, the Muslim ban guy, has been able to credibly position himself as a less Islamophobic candidate, but I guess you weren't paying attention to that. Here is a NYT article that mentions that undecided voters were considering Trump because of the situation in Gaza (archive.is). I'm pretty skeptical that Trump is going to improve the situation but it is so bleak under the Biden administration that I wouldn't be surprised if he did or at least didn't make it worse.
• I guess I need to say at this point that I am not antisemitic. I oppose Israel because it is a fascist apartheid state that is ethnically cleansing the region. Nothing more or less than that. I think it is antisemitic to believe all Jews support the actions of Israel. Israel and the US have become diplomatically isolated on this in the last year and I fear the future may be grim for the Israeli people if they stop receiving so much of the military support they use to commit this genocide, and they risk open war with Lebanon and Iran every day.
• Argue about where to assign blame all you want, the working class is justifiable very stressed, including me, a guy that enjoys sifting through economic data, when they see the cost of food rising and they're not getting raises to go with it. There were years of negative real wage growth. There were years of extremely high profit growth for the concentrated monopolies that dominate our economy. Everyone hates this, left right and center. The last president to raise the minimum wage was George W Bush. What the fuck? A democrat that doesn't talk about raising the minimum wage by a lot and raising taxes on the rich is a guaranteed loser, especially in light of the last few years. Kamala's platform included a very popular proposal to stop price gouging during economic crises. Why did she never talk about this?
• The democratic party's response to the deepening climate catastrophe continues to be beyond inadequate. The summers are now just continual forest fires and smoke from the forest fires is becoming a health problem for asthmatics. And the Biden administration is effectively continuing Trump's trade war against China (we lost it by the way) by trying to block affordable Chinese EVs and solar panels.

It usually takes you 5 to 10 years to figure out that I'm right about everything but hopefully you can quickstart the process with this guide. I look forward to seeing you at the protests about this stuff when Trump continues doing what Biden was doing and what Kamala promised she was going to continue doing.

(Any other big things I should add?)

I suppose materially, Republicans definitely cause more harm at least in the short term (and generally long term too).

But Democrats are pathetic. I know the phrase "democrats snatch defeat from the hand of victory" is a meme. But wow-wee. This failure looked to be even worse than the 2016 campaign. At least you could make the excuse back then that Trump was such clown it was unthinkable that he could win.

Since the DNC I have been flabbergasted about the campaign strategy. But I figured hey? Maybe they know something I don't? Maybe the strategy is also eek out a win, but a win none the less.

Democrats are demons. Apathetic moral demons. I knew they sucked, but I was on board with "the lesser of two evils" Not a good long term strategy, but it was what it was. The rage i felt for them during "normal" shitty circumstances has become all consuming. Monstrous party.

Trump should have lost Barry Goldwater style. Democrats could EASILY have done that. These people are so beholden to the Capitalists that love republicans even more that they are willing to hand power over to these facists.

And Republicans in the cabinet too

Why they all so upset? Very weird.