1.
Posting on democrats saying, that they invested no money on reaching black and latino voters (message wise), but that they won because they so efficiently reached black and latino voters at the same time. Which is touted as the "why we won' narrative at the same time (First election result reactions, democratic party)
Well then - lets not examine, that the reason for this was, that the democratic campaign forgot to translate their messaging into spanish, and instead had a big social justice warrior festival, looking like this:
...addressing mostly young white educated voters.
I think thats only fair - as it is exactly what Sanders is pleading right now. Just a bit longer, just a bit longer, until you're desire for change matters.
Just another two years, but then...!
Those apparently easy to acquire (someone just listened to them, and talked to them in their language) latin votes lost over the last months, are far harder to gain back on your side, than to suppress once more. I hope you realize that. NYT spoke about 'non loyal male latin votes' for a reason.
To translate that - thats 'fuck them, they werent supposed to show up'.
Wow, the reality distortion is strong:
So much dumb and not wanting to accept reality, and basking in that the stance in the title of the video is now used to cover up what happened (why Trump came this close, why this wasnt a landslide victory), is... well, something.
People sticking to what they want to believe, even if they say the entire opposite has happened... Not just an exclusive for republicans.
--------------------------------------------
2.
Posting on democratic elites trying to frame the results as 'dumb uneducated masses cant be trusted to think' we cant even allow the Sanders wing to speak at all (Democratic party election result reactions a day later.)
Oh, this is sugar as well.
Thought the NYT 'not frequently voting, not college educated, latino males' werent supposed to show up - stance is rough? Watch this.
--------------------------------------------
3.
Posting on how none of the conventional political narratives that were peddled before the election match up with the results. (media reaction)
More sugar.
--------------------------------------------
4.
Establishment wing in the democratic party pushing for a different interpretation than the progressive wing, and what this resulted in, in one of the most 'progressive leaning' media outlets out there reporting (media report)
If you want to see Democracy Now saying the opposite of Katie Halper (at least somewhat). Watch this:
God this is kingly.
Left doesnt know what to do with the results. And how would they.
--------------------------------------------
5.
Personal commentary. Interpretation.
Broken down, this is literally "the left wanted to win, by adhering to college educated voters and wannabes from the people that could get a leg up in the virtue signaling contests (acted like college educated voters), and at least had one racial minority property".
Same as with climate change, btw.
F*ck all those people that dont have any social mobility perspective - but with much money for the people that let themselves being sold out to pacify the dumb stupid masses. (Those organizers were the people that were allowed to declare themselves the 'true winners' this time..
) And now part of the DNCs perspective is, to pacify the stupid sell outs, that cant be explained to easily, why in all racial minorities Trump actually gained more voters over the race against Clinton (percentage wise), and why the fault lines are REALLY, do you have a higher education or not - throughout america.
Next step - idk, civil war?
Oh no - a Biden that says, that he's the president of 'bringing America back together again'. By addressing none of his voters needs, and trying to pacify the uneducated voters instead (which costs money), which will rile up his educated constituency, so civil war..
I'm only joking of course. War isnt what follows.
But its a little bit tough to get out of this situation, and its entirely obvious - why most western democracies turn to 'what lessons on 'not to drive democracy into the ground' do we derive from this?'.
I wonder what Putins reaction to this is..
Bwhahaha, this is good.
edit: Oh, and if Biden actually follows a progressive agenda - he doesnt get senate majorities (presumably), and the stuff that gets through wont be enough to bring the rest of the minority vote around next time, and would minimize support within his 'educated' base. So in four years time, you'd see a likely backlash on this years vote.
--------------------------------------------
6.
Trying to find a way that would allow both wings of the democratic party to work together for the next four years, theoretical analysis, commentary (trying to explore concepts I might have missed)
Oddly enough - a way out of this would be to go full in on "climate change prevention". So you do the following:
1. You f*ck over your higher educated constituency and give them nothing but the warm feeling to do something good for their grandchildren (thats free).
2. You put all your investment into domestic infrastructure renewal (make it pro climate change as well). Which would leave poorer constitencies with hope that there is something going on in the economy.
3. This would also allow you to coin 'progressives' as the winners (which is happening right now).
Issue - in four years about every low income person should realize that going all in on renewable energy isnt the growth engine its made out to be. And at the same time everey higher education voter might realize, that they got not much out of it (maybe so, maybe not). So in four years you have the policy reversal? And a stronger republican party for the following 100 years?
Or you make 'climate change prevention' *work* as both a growth engine for college educated folks and non college educated folks. And have it be a success story thats big enough to actually make that 'pact' not look so implausible.
But that would not bring the "country closer together" in a way - because that would deminish republican importance.
And thats not what Biden has announced.
Or is known for.
Bwhahaha.
--------------------------------------------
7.
Preliminary summary, commentary
Most likely outcome probably is still 'f*ck over uneducated people'. You do 'climate change prevention stuff' (just as an example, your not in it with your entire heart). You take what little gains you can get from it and distribute it amongst international elites, produce jobs outside of america, and so on. Let AOC run her 'this is the job creation motor of the future' gambit into the ground. Then loose to republicans once the non college educated have realized it. Then let republicans f*ck them over, and the cycle continue...
Issue - this time around, as democrats, you are loosing face. And voters. Probably long term. (Give them health care to mitigate. (Although probably not achievable.))
But its the most stable perspective for industry interests and the donor class. So best growth perspective?
All this is presuming Dems dont get the senate this time around, which is somewhat likely.
If Dems get the senate, they could change policy longterm in favor of progressives, so you could do bigger projects and lets say - have an investment phase, followed by a growth phase, without policy outlook changing in between. Which would potentially align both parties with this. (Could be in the interests of both parties.)
But as it stands currently, the gains are just too high for republicans to f*ck over democrats, to ruin them longterm, by making sure that whatever they try to do in the next four years in terms of significant change, doesnt stick (making _many_ people mad).
Imho.
--------------------------------------------
8.
News item on top GOP representatives backing Trump for about 2 more months for the looks and populism
Bwahaha! Top republican representatives back Trump to hang himself for as long as possible, to sew chaos.
This gets better by the minute.
(And is probably to be seen as a move in a fight for the senate majority.
)
--------------------------------------------
9.
Establishment conclusion and outlook (media report)
The Economist Panel:
"Would be great if you could keep that high voter turnout, without this sense of doom on both sides." Translation: Would be great to suppress the infrequent male, less educated latino vote.
I dont think this is confirmation bias on my part..
*called it*
edit: Other points in the video:
- probably most likely to have little changes that look ambitioned (and do much alongside the progressives agenda)
- probably something on climate change that would profit international elites only
- healthcare not likely...
- republicans probably following a scorched earth strategy (or at least likely) to cash in on the next elections
Hey, we think along the same lines, I like!
--------------------------------------------
10.
Left wing conspiracy theory (investigative reporting on voter suppression by dempgraphic and state) media reporting
If you want to read a few left wing conspiracy theories, Greg Palast delivers.
He is one of the main guys behind the 'voter register shenanigans' followups in the past years (get black, latino and asian votes delisted), and a little bit excentric, a little bit strapped for cash (sensationalistic) - but nevertheless, he does ivestigative journalism work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Palast
Did so as well this time around.
Quick summery here (in german use google translate on it or smthg):
https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=a153d90b
Or read his current book ("How Trump Stole 2020")