- Mar 8, 2017
- 479
- 397
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Joe Manchin is a good choice. Center right. I REALLY doubt if he will ever be on Harris's list.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Well, I did say they masked their efforts better.I disagree. I'd say the right has been more into "policy politics" for the most part. Yes, there is a racism streak running through it, but a lot of minority groups have moved in and out of the Right over the decades mostly because of policy rather than identity. If Republicans could manage to contain their racist attitudes and maintain their policies, they'd have most minority voters in hand. They'd even pick up a good proportion of black voters. The problem is that if you sit among Republicans long enough, the racism of too many of them leaks out.
I think the Democrats really cemented themselves into identity politics during Hillary Clinton's run against Trump. Clinton's campaign was all about identity rather than policy. That's when the Democrats lost, for instance, the support of average workers (although the unions themselves, if not the union membership) was still hanging on to the Democratic party.
Beshear was born in Louisville. His dad was also governor from 2007-15He's also actually from Appalachia - unlike Vance, who just pretends he is.
Yeah, that is the sad part, but Sonski is pro-environment and for making healthcare cheaper, things that most democrats (and even a few Republicans) want. Why can't the democrats just accept a pro-life, anti-woke guy onto their ticket?He's also not a Democrat. The Democrats aren't going to put a non-Democrat on their ticket in either slot.
No, I'd disagree that those are specific identities as regarded by "identity politics." The identity politics of the Democratic party, are ultimately based on the Marxist principles of Critical Theory, and that's where the problem ultimately lies. When they say they can't define what a woman is, that makes perfect sense through the lens of Critical Gender Theory.Well, I did say they masked their efforts better.
Even aside from the “racist streak” - all the appeals to religion and family values; all the comments about “real americans” or “coastal elites” were appeals to specific identities. They’re just (usually) not quite as obvious as “vote for me because you’re black”.
Ok, fair - but he's spent the last decade or so in Kentucky state politics. I'd consider that bigger "Appalachian" cred than Vance growing up in suburban Ohio. Don't get me wrong, Vance's childhood seems to have been quite rough, and he's definitely a great success story. It just seems to me that he puts way too much stock in his grandparents being from rural Kentucky. My grandparents grew up on a farm in North Dakota and in Pennsylvania coal country, but I don't pretend that that gives me any real insight into the lives of farmers or coal miners.Beshear was born in Louisville. His dad was also governor from 2007-15
I know that those don't map onto the typical perception of "identity politics" - my point is that that definition of "identity politics" is... flawed (to put it politely)... in a way that benefits Republicans. All of the appeals to Christianity that I remember from the 80's and 90's, were appeals to religious identity, that often other-ed folks who didn't share those identities. After 9/11 and then in Obama's first term, the lines were drawn between Muslims and non-Muslims, and the UCC vs other protestants. "Family values" often appeals to folks with heterosexual, and, more recently, cis-gendered identities. Republicans use of identity politics may not be as overtly Marxist in nature, but it's still an appeal to certain identities.No, I'd disagree that those are specific identities as regarded by "identity politics." The identity politics of the Democratic party, are ultimately based on the Marxist principles of Critical Theory, and that's where the problem ultimately lies. When they say they can't define what a woman is, that makes perfect sense through the lens of Critical Gender Theory.
The reason many ethnic minorities--even of different religions--can be Republican is because they share the same policy desires for "family values," and more definitely abhor the identity politics of the Democratic party.
Because they are a majority party and pro-life is a minority position.Yeah, that is the sad part, but Sonski is pro-environment and for making healthcare cheaper, things that most democrats (and even a few Republicans) want. Why can't the democrats just accept a pro-life, anti-woke guy onto their ticket?
Does Vance have a lot of traction on the right for being from coal country or is it just because he's (now) a Trumper? My impression is that it's the latter, and that Hillbilly Elegy was written for the Yale/NYT set, not the "folks back home."Ok, fair - but he's spent the last decade or so in Kentucky state politics. I'd consider that bigger "Appalachian" cred than Vance growing up in suburban Ohio. Don't get me wrong, Vance's childhood seems to have been quite rough, and he's definitely a great success story. It just seems to me that he puts way too much stock in his grandparents being from rural Kentucky. My grandparents grew up on a farm in North Dakota and in Pennsylvania coal country, but I don't pretend that that gives me any real insight into the lives of farmers or coal miners.
I don't know how much traction he actually gets from it, but he called himself a "hillbilly" in his RNC speech and played up his family's roots in Kentucky:Does Vance have a lot of traction on the right for being from coal country or is it just because he's (now) a Trumper? My impression is that it's the latter, and that Hillbilly Elegy was written for the Yale/NYT set, not the "folks back home."
Joe Biden screwed up, and my community paid the price. Now, I was lucky. Despite the closing factories and the growing addiction in towns like mine, in my life, I had a guardian angel by my side. She was an old woman who could barely walk but she was tough as nails.
I called her “Mamaw,” the name we hillbillies gave to our grandmothers.
Now when I proposed to my wife, we were in law school, and I said, “Honey, I come with $120,000 worth of law school debt, and a cemetery plot on a mountainside in Eastern Kentucky.”
And I guess standing here tonight it’s just gotten weirder and weirder, honey. But that’s what she was getting. Now that cemetery plot in Eastern Kentucky is near my family’s ancestral home. And like a lot of people, we came from the mountains of Appalachia into the factories of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
Now that’s Kentucky coal country, one of the 10 —
Now, it’s one of the 10 poorest counties in the entire United States of America.
It’s going to anger a lot of the base if a black female (especially the 1st black female VP) is replaced
I don't know how much traction he actually gets from it, but he called himself a "hillbilly" in his RNC speech and played up his family's roots in Kentucky:
It doesn’t say much for some Democrats that they won’t vote for a black femaleIf Harris is "replaced" then it will be the "base" that does it. Granted, at this point it looks as if Democrats are going to rally behind Harris but it is still early. Again, the delegates to the convention should have the final say -- and they should. It could be that the Democrats do another closed room deal where Harris is named the nominee, and they essentially require the delegates to rubber stamp Harris.
There are plenty of articles stating this would be terribly wrong and even alienate the base, as it draws comparisons with 2016 with Hillary seemingly anointed by the Democratic National Committee to be the nominee.
Not to mention, while there might be some who are upset if Harris, as a Black Female, is replaced and don't vote, it is also highly likely that many voters will refuse to vote for her because she is Black and she is Female. I recall in the last month a female poster stating she would never vote for a female, that women shouldn't be in politics. And this seems to be something a percentage of voters agree with.
I think the best thing is to allow the discussions proceed, let those who want to back Harris do that, but then let the party "base" who are delegates ultimately decide who they think the best nominee to represent the Democratic Party is.
CRT is just an excuse. The truth is, that working class men and women of all races, creeds and colors have more in common as working class men and women than they have with the elites of whatever identity group they happen to belong to. But long before CRT was a thing it was obvious that elite Democrats preferred to with the elites of various minorities, rather than directly with the laborers in the labor party the Democrats used to be. CRT may be shaping policy, but it's not what really motivates it.No, I'd disagree that those are specific identities as regarded by "identity politics." The identity politics of the Democratic party, are ultimately based on the Marxist principles of Critical Theory, and that's where the problem ultimately lies. When they say they can't define what a woman is, that makes perfect sense through the lens of Critical Gender Theory.
The reason many ethnic minorities--even of different religions--can be Republican is because they share the same policy desires for "family values," and more definitely abhor the identity politics of the Democratic party.
This is *still* not the conspiracy theory board.I doubt she will be the actual nominee but if Hilary is VP then whoever is president is going to be assassinated by a lone gunman of course.
Roger Stone is a political dirty tricks and disinformation operative. He has all the credibility of an email from the prince of Nigeria.Roger Stone has been predicting Michelle Obama for a long time. It's either her, Hilary, Newsome, or possibly Whitimore but I doubt it would be Whitimore
I haven't said anything to disagree with that. "Working class men and women of all races, creeds and colors " are not an identity group. And the DNC has definitely set them aside.CRT is just an excuse. The truth is, that working class men and women of all races, creeds and colors have more in common as working class men and women than they have with the elites of whatever identity group they happen to belong to.
Critical Theory is a bigger thing than you realize. It's the driving ideology of identity politics.But long before CRT was a thing it was obvious that elite Democrats preferred to with the elites of various minorities, rather than directly with the laborers in the labor party the Democrats used to be. CRT may be shaping policy, but it's not what really motivates it.
They will still be saying its actually gonna be Hilary 100 years after she dead.This is *still* not the conspiracy theory board.
Roger Stone is a political dirty tricks and disinformation operative. He has all the credibility of an email from the prince of Nigeria.
AROOO!They will be saying its actually gonna be Hilary 100 years after she dead.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?