You must log in or # to comment.
Yes, Joe. You always were. You are the villain in the story that made all of this possible.
Yes but rogan’s betrayal was not possible without the party forcing unwinnable strategies with the most unpopular choice, without a single challenge. None for house or senate either.
First thing is first, the dem party running opposition is multiplying this massive formula by zero right at the start.
Kamala was objectively a better choice than Trump, it was obvious to anyone who wasn’t brain rotted by people like Rogan.
Syphillis is objectively better than aids.
But it was not going to win the election, much less restore the republic.
We knew being not the other guy was not enough, that the other guys are nazis, that the electorate does not know that.
So explain to me why forcing a doomed to fail strategy is not disqualifying for dem establishment figures?
Even now you regurgitate their projections of blame? Why should anyone trust your analysis of anything if you still trust those establishment conservatives to run the dem party while you are at it?
This is parody, right?
You cannot be serious. I levied questions about how the election was thrown by the dems from the start.
You cannot answer with reason.
The reasonable choice was to vote for Kamala out of sheer harm reduction. Throwing a hissy fit and taking your ball and going home because you think we should be playing a different game helped nobody.
You are vote shaming which is neither here nor there.
The question is knowing status quo candidates whose only selling point is they are harm reduction, was not enough to win, let alone with the most unpopular candidate they had on offer, never breaching 30 pc approval all term pre anointation, the vp of a prez at 40 pc for 3 years.
You knew the situation, but trusted the same people that gave us hillary and biden, to run a doomed to fail strategy.
So how is it reasonable to appoint kamala, and accept her and the status quo strategy knowing it was throwing the game?
