2024 ELECTION THREAD

Wow she is so based

checking back CNN was great coverage but MSNBC is absolute the nut low, such dogshit coverage on election night. CNN was far more fair and neutral than MSNBC

didnt even tune in to fox for 1 sec but i assume they spin it a certian way

This is to be expected. CNN is still biased but seems to have gotten better in recent months. NewsNation's coverage was really good. They're new, and a lot of people don't know about them, but compared to other cable news channels, it's not close.

I like AOC and it's fun to watch the right lose their minds about her.

However, like many on the left/far-left, she doesn't so much get or like the working class as she just hates rich people. This narrative isn't an election winner in the country of aspiration.

Congratulations, Democrats you have found the most annoying thing in the ****ing Galaxy and hung it around your necks.

Sam Harris post-mortem on the election hits the mark.

Yeah. She is dedicated to a progressive agenda, which she sincerely seems be believe in and her loyal constituents align with her on, and doesn't really seem willing to compromise for mainstream appeal. She has charisma and is attractive, but most of her positions are non starters for most Americans, especially working class.

Which is fine. She can represent her progressive district with her progressive agenda as long as she wants. Nothing wrong with that.

Unrelated, but the online right is speculating she is pregnant based on her current appearance.

"It may be said, however, that even if the theoretical book-trained Socialist is not a working man himself, at least he is actuated by a love of the working class. He is endeavouring to shed his bourgeois status and fight on the side of the proletariat--that, obviously, must be his motive.

But is it? Sometimes I look at a Socialist--the intellectual, tract-writing type of Socialist, with his pullover, his fuzzy hair, and his Marxian quotation--and wonder what the devil his motive really is. It is often difficult to believe that it is a love of anybody, especially of the working class, from whom he is of all people the furthest removed. The underlying motive of many Socialists, I believe, is simply a hypertrophied sense of order. The present state of affairs offends them not because it causes misery, still less because it makes freedom impossible, but because it is untidy; what they desire, basically, is to reduce the world to something resembling a chessboard . . . Though seldom giving much evidence of affection for the exploited, he is perfectly capable of displaying hatred--a sort of queer, theoretical, in vacua hatred--against the exploiters. Hence the grand old Socialist sport of denouncing the bourgeoisie. It is strange how easily almost any Socialist writer can lash himself into frenzies of rage against the class to which, by birth or by adoption, he himself invariably belongs." —George Orwell

Always liked Sam Harris .
Pretty good as well here .

This plus the simultaneous middle-class envy and disgust at the working class ("deplorables", "human garbage") that Orwell has also written about.

If anyone wants to know why the Dems lost the election and left-wing parties in general are struggling, it's all in The Road to Wigan Pier.

This is from Chapter 11.

I cant imagine thinking that AOC is in any way a socialist let alone a Marxist. she is an establishment right wing Dem that supported GenocideJoe.

The veracity of the socialist/Marxist label is secondary to her words, behavior and ways of appealing to various identity groups.

Bernie doesn't play that game.

right, its all for show and the media plays along. Bernie too for that matter.

Just remove the president, along with the next seven on the presidential succession list and you're good to go.

I get the impression that Bernie has noble intentions.

Republicans deregulating and not impeding private choices as much as democrats is actually "good for the climate" as well.

This is what happens basically everywhere all the times for all topics, less regulation is better for human beings.

Note that Texas has 3/4 of the population of California

I don’t know, I like my mandated minimum vacation time, access to healthcare, parental leave, protection from hazardous chemicals, etc. Pretty sure the people not or less covered because of a lack of regulation are worse off.

UK is over 40% to Texas 30%. I appreciate Lucium seal of approval for regulation although I think we could do far better

will you agree that you'd bang her though?

It all comes from your salary anyway, they aren't giving you anything for free.

Your salary would be higher otherwise and/or your benefit package include those provisions anyway if you prefer them to cash, in a free market. They aren't doing it for free.

Mandating benefits is like mandating a minimum wage. The cost is at the low entry level margin, some jobs just cease to exist because the mandated package is too onerous. But you don't see the missing jobs so you don't feel like someone is worse off.

minimum wage just removes the jobs that don't make the cut, and comes from other people salaries (you compress the scale at the lower end), or higher prices (consumers pay it). They aren't giving you anything for free

Exactly

Feel free to say the same exact thing once more btw and do tell us how industrial england is a utopia for anyone other than factory owners