Kansas Crimson

yea, so here we are.

I think these are symptoms of a bigger disease - with that disease being, "a fine business choice."

Or, put another way, the disease is this for-profit commodification of abso-fucking-lutely everything, including information itself.

or, if I'm wrong, and the for-profit free market that commodified information is also the best solution to solve the issue of commodified information, let me know what stock to invest in for that.

as for strategy and tactics - and this could go in any number of other threads - I think it's wise for Dems to go to school on the flood-with-shit era of the modern media messaging battle that they're otherwise loosing.

But, even more significantly is, they need to really develop their bullpen. Or their farm league. For fuck's sake, have some talent ready to call up. Coach up some stars here! The last thing they need is another primary like, "gee I wonder which underwhelming soon-to-be-has-been newcomer or some similarly underwhelming never-was familiar face it'll be"

For that matter, pubs should do the same...assuming they're not gonna really come up with some sorta Trump 3.0 scheme, which should prob be assumed to be the plan, until they demonstrate or are forced to otherwise.

BiggDick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 2:48 pm as for strategy and tactics - and this could go in any number of other threads - I think it's wise for Dems to go to school on the flood-with-shit era of the modern media messaging battle that they're otherwise loosing.

But, even more significantly is, they need to really develop their bullpen. Or their farm league. For fuck's sake, have some talent ready to call up. Coach up some stars here! The last thing they need is another primary like, "gee I wonder which underwhelming soon-to-be-has-been newcomer or some similarly underwhelming never-was familiar face it'll be"

For that matter, pubs should do the same...assuming they're not gonna really come up with some sorta Trump 3.0 scheme, which should prob be assumed to be the plan, until they demonstrate or are forced to otherwise.

Yeah, nothing says "we need to coach up the young stars" like losing to a 78 year old felon.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 2:49 pm

BiggDick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 2:48 pm as for strategy and tactics - and this could go in any number of other threads - I think it's wise for Dems to go to school on the flood-with-shit era of the modern media messaging battle that they're otherwise loosing.

But, even more significantly is, they need to really develop their bullpen. Or their farm league. For fuck's sake, have some talent ready to call up. Coach up some stars here! The last thing they need is another primary like, "gee I wonder which underwhelming soon-to-be-has-been newcomer or some similarly underwhelming never-was familiar face it'll be"

For that matter, pubs should do the same...assuming they're not gonna really come up with some sorta Trump 3.0 scheme, which should prob be assumed to be the plan, until they demonstrate or are forced to otherwise.

Yeah, nothing says "we need to coach up the young stars" like losing to a 78 year old felon.

^^^

smh

in today's edition of, Holy Fuck!

yes, maybe if dems DID coach up some young stars* then they wouldn't have lost to a 78 year old felon!

For real, I'm surprised that take is controversial. What do you think the move is otherwise, to NOT coach up some young stars and prop any old schmuck up there on the chance they'll win the messaging game anyway?








*and also give those stars a chance to shine in an actual primary, rather than doubling down on an even older 81yo candidate until it was too late, only to then have to hastily pinch-hit a never-was-popular veep as candidate instead

BiggDick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:02 pm in today's edition of, Holy Fuck!

yes, maybe if dems DID coach up some young stars* then they wouldn't have lost to a 78 year old felon!

For real, I'm surprised that take is controversial. What do you think the move is otherwise, to NOT coach up some young stars and prop any old schmuck up there on the chance they'll win the messaging game anyway?








*and also give those stars a chance to shine in an actual primary, rather than doubling down on an even older 81yo candidate until it was too late, only to then have to hastily pinch-hit a never-was-popular veep as candidate instead

I, personally, don't think you can formulate a strategy until you know the game you are playing.

Right now, we don't know yet whether we're dealing with a grifty, two-bit kakistocracy, or a sophisticated shadow government that is an existential threat to our democracy.

And it could very well be one of those poles, or something in the middle.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:42 pm

BiggDick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:02 pm in today's edition of, Holy Fuck!

yes, maybe if dems DID coach up some young stars* then they wouldn't have lost to a 78 year old felon!

For real, I'm surprised that take is controversial. What do you think the move is otherwise, to NOT coach up some young stars and prop any old schmuck up there on the chance they'll win the messaging game anyway?








*and also give those stars a chance to shine in an actual primary, rather than doubling down on an even older 81yo candidate until it was too late, only to then have to hastily pinch-hit a never-was-popular veep as candidate instead

I, personally, don't think you can formulate a strategy until you know the game you are playing.

Right now, we don't know yet whether we're dealing with a grifty, two-bit kakistocracy, or a sophisticated shadow government that is an existential threat to our democracy.

And it could very well be one of those poles, or something in the middle.

Who thinks we will have an election in 2028?

Jake Paul 2028

life imitates art and Idiocracy takes one giant step towards fruition

Overlander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:46 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:42 pm

BiggDick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:02 pm in today's edition of, Holy Fuck!

yes, maybe if dems DID coach up some young stars* then they wouldn't have lost to a 78 year old felon!

For real, I'm surprised that take is controversial. What do you think the move is otherwise, to NOT coach up some young stars and prop any old schmuck up there on the chance they'll win the messaging game anyway?








*and also give those stars a chance to shine in an actual primary, rather than doubling down on an even older 81yo candidate until it was too late, only to then have to hastily pinch-hit a never-was-popular veep as candidate instead

I, personally, don't think you can formulate a strategy until you know the game you are playing.

Right now, we don't know yet whether we're dealing with a grifty, two-bit kakistocracy, or a sophisticated shadow government that is an existential threat to our democracy.

And it could very well be one of those poles, or something in the middle.

Who thinks we will have an election in 2028?

Exactly!

You are smarter about this stuff than I am. I did not at all one little bit like where this is going:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/putin-off ... -not-safe/

What has saved all of us from the worst case is Trump's own venality, stupidity, lack of focus and lack of principles.

Putin has none of those problems, and he can (obviously) play a long game.

I mean, I'm as concerned by the stench surrounding the Trump-Putin relationship as anyone, but that article seems a little clickbaity.

It takes some Putin comment about Trump assassination attempts and then jumps all the way to a list of murder accusations against Putin, and even links a Wikipedia article as a source...um, what sort of journalism is this, anyway?

But yea, I wouldn't put it past Putin to be speaking cryptically here...espically cuz he also adds that he thinks Trump is a "clever and cautious man," I mean, LMAO

I don't care about the commentary, I care about the direct quotes.

And I think back to the whole fucking meals that were made - even just by our resident comrades!* - over one instance of a bullet being shot at or near Trump, and another instance of a gun being found somewhat nearby him.

And I think now to the people we're talking about putting in charge of our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms.

And I think ahead to what our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms might do in the case there ever happens to be another incident like the ones this summer.

* For example, as is relevant to this thread, it is an article of FAITH on the right that whatever was done, was done by Democrats. They are very cagey about flipping between "the shooter was a radical leftist" to "Kamala did this by her violent rhetoric", or what the fuck ever, but the effect of the misinformation is that a huge part of our country believes without evidence that "they" tried to kill Trump.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 4:45 pm I don't care about the commentary, I care about the direct quotes.

And I think back to the whole fucking meals that were made - even just by our resident comrades!* - over one instance of a bullet being shot at or near Trump, and another instance of a gun being found somewhat nearby him.

And I think now to the people we're talking about putting in charge of our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms.

And I think ahead to what our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms might do in the case there ever happens to be another incident like the ones this summer.

* For example, as is relevant to this thread, it is an article of FAITH on the right that whatever was done, was done by Democrats. They are very cagey about flipping between "the shooter was a radical leftist" to "Kamala did this by her violent rhetoric", or what the fuck ever, but the effect of the misinformation is that a huge part of our country believes without evidence that "they" tried to kill Trump.

Once again, if "they" wanted Trump dead, he would be dead.

Neither of those would be assassins had ANY link to ANYTHING left.

And I will say, once again (using my experience and training as an Expert Sharpshooter) that you wouldn't send a nimrod out to make a 300 yard shot with a 100 yard weapon.

Either of those shots would have been taken from a much longer distance, and the people taking that shot would never be found.

JFC, "they" can infect half the world with a deadly virus... rig an election to their favor... rape and murder children by the 1,000s with no evidence left.... create one false flag after another while leaving no evidence....

But when they need an elite sniper to make a kill shot on a fat, immovable object, they send Joe Lunchbox and his Bass Pro assault rifle?

BiggDick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 3:02 pm in today's edition of, Holy Fuck!

yes, maybe if dems DID coach up some young stars* then they wouldn't have lost to a 78 year old felon!

For real, I'm surprised that take is controversial. What do you think the move is otherwise, to NOT coach up some young stars and prop any old schmuck up there on the chance they'll win the messaging game anyway?


*and also give those stars a chance to shine in an actual primary, rather than doubling down on an even older 81yo candidate until it was too late, only to then have to hastily pinch-hit a never-was-popular veep as candidate instead

Define "coaching up", (be specific), and how that would be distinct from and a more effective way to choose winning presidential Democratic candidates, than the current crucible of having to demonstrate you can run for and win local offices, that's then parlayed into an effort to ascend to even higher statewide and national offices by Democrats, as a way to pick their candidates.

Overlander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 4:53 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 4:45 pm I don't care about the commentary, I care about the direct quotes.

And I think back to the whole fucking meals that were made - even just by our resident comrades!* - over one instance of a bullet being shot at or near Trump, and another instance of a gun being found somewhat nearby him.

And I think now to the people we're talking about putting in charge of our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms.

And I think ahead to what our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms might do in the case there ever happens to be another incident like the ones this summer.

* For example, as is relevant to this thread, it is an article of FAITH on the right that whatever was done, was done by Democrats. They are very cagey about flipping between "the shooter was a radical leftist" to "Kamala did this by her violent rhetoric", or what the fuck ever, but the effect of the misinformation is that a huge part of our country believes without evidence that "they" tried to kill Trump.

Once again, if "they" wanted Trump dead, he would be dead.

Neither of those would be assassins had ANY link to ANYTHING left.

And I will say, once again (using my experience and training as an Expert Sharpshooter) that you wouldn't send a nimrod out to make a 300 yard shot with a 100 yard weapon.

Either of those shots would have been taken from a much longer distance, and the people taking that shot would never be found.

JFC, "they" can infect half the world with a deadly virus... rig an election to their favor... rape and murder children by the 1,000s with no evidence left.... create one false flag after another while leaving no evidence....

But when they need an elite sniper to make a kill shot on a fat, immovable object, they send Joe Lunchbox and his Bass Pro assault rifle?

Right, so just play it forward to the next attempt (or comparable event like a bombing or cyber attack or plane crash or outbreak or whatever else).

When our DNI says that there is no credible evidence of Russian involvement...

...or when SecDef says that it wasn't white supremacists...

...or when the FBI says it was a splinter cell of violent leftists...

...where are we?

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 5:01 pm

Overlander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 4:53 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 4:45 pm I don't care about the commentary, I care about the direct quotes.

And I think back to the whole fucking meals that were made - even just by our resident comrades!* - over one instance of a bullet being shot at or near Trump, and another instance of a gun being found somewhat nearby him.

And I think now to the people we're talking about putting in charge of our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms.

And I think ahead to what our intelligence, defense and law enforcement arms might do in the case there ever happens to be another incident like the ones this summer.

* For example, as is relevant to this thread, it is an article of FAITH on the right that whatever was done, was done by Democrats. They are very cagey about flipping between "the shooter was a radical leftist" to "Kamala did this by her violent rhetoric", or what the fuck ever, but the effect of the misinformation is that a huge part of our country believes without evidence that "they" tried to kill Trump.

Once again, if "they" wanted Trump dead, he would be dead.

Neither of those would be assassins had ANY link to ANYTHING left.

And I will say, once again (using my experience and training as an Expert Sharpshooter) that you wouldn't send a nimrod out to make a 300 yard shot with a 100 yard weapon.

Either of those shots would have been taken from a much longer distance, and the people taking that shot would never be found.

JFC, "they" can infect half the world with a deadly virus... rig an election to their favor... rape and murder children by the 1,000s with no evidence left.... create one false flag after another while leaving no evidence....

But when they need an elite sniper to make a kill shot on a fat, immovable object, they send Joe Lunchbox and his Bass Pro assault rifle?

Right, so just play it forward to the next attempt (or comparable event like a bombing or cyber attack or plane crash or outbreak or whatever else).

When our DNI says that there is no credible evidence of Russian involvement...

...or when SecDef says that it wasn't white supremacists...

...or when the FBI says it was a splinter cell of violent leftists...

...where are we?

100% probable.
All we are lacking is the specific date.

Remember the immediate barrage of "intelligence" screaming about the "terrorist attack" at our Northern Border?
Immediate cries of it's Biden's fault that terrorists are attacking us from both borders... this is what happens when you have weak leadership... our response needs to be fierce and rapid.

Turns out that it was just some dumbass driving way too fast. I don't seem to recall anyone who made these ridiculous statements come out and say "my bad"...or sorry.

Nope, just let the claims lay there, that is all the evidence we needed.

Every single event that pops up over the next few years will be presented as "evidence" that the left is behind EVERYTHING.

Hitler and Goebbels created this tactic. Steve Bannon perfected it. Trump delivers it.

And, hair-pullingly (god damn it), we KNOW that certain folks among us will use the accepted, evidence-light (or -less!) “fact” of prior bad acts by the left as evidence of the left’s commission of whatever comes next.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 5:50 pm And, hair-pullingly (god damn it), we KNOW that certain folks among us will use the accepted, evidence-light (or -less!) “fact” of prior bad acts by the left as evidence of the left’s commission of whatever comes next.

Yes.
Frantic meme and "trusted source" scanning for ANYTHING incriminatory, presented as FACT.

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2024 4:58 pm
Define "coaching up", (be specific), and how that would be distinct from and a more effective way to choose winning presidential Democratic candidates, than the current crucible of having to demonstrate you can run for and win local offices, that's then parlayed into an effort to ascend to even higher statewide and national offices by Democrats, as a way to pick their candidates.

this is a good question!

and it's the question we need other be asking the Democratic Party, and the Democratic Party needs to be asking itself.

I think it'll be a lot of the usual suspects, plus some newcomers.

And not that I'm saying I'm a fan, but I think the only one who really stands out right now may be AOC.

Or, if there is any other up-and-comer among Dem ranks who possesses the "apparently this is what it takes to win over voters nowadays" combo of that cosplay-against-the-establishment sorta populist appeal, and social media/messaging savvy, I dunno who it is.

but with that said, If I had to bet right now, imma go out on a limb and say Dems will desperately try for some white male centrist anyway, even if no one seems particularly excited about him otherwise, even if it means giving the 2016 Bernie treatment to AOC or some similar otherwise-popular candidate.

...either that, or if Trump and the GOP pull some shit about allowing 3rd terms again, then push all yer chips forward for Obama.

...or, if dems want a particular game plan:

Just figure out someone, anyone, who can effectively sell the American people on universal healthcare.

And I think the tricky part is less selling the American people on the idea of universal healthcare itself, and more selling people on the idea that Dems will like actually do it, no for real this time.

I guess that's to say, I think the Democratic Party brand has a sincerity issue among voters.

i’m sure sincerity woulda won the day



so dumb