Media Meltdown and also Media Bias 101

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

 

Burns is doing a little click bait here. If you read the article, he's not saying that Orban's defeat is bad for the Dems at all; all he is saying is the same thing everyone and their brother who has looked at the Democratic party Post Obama has said and continues to say, which is that the current national Democratic party is still a mess and can increase its chances substantially  if they can do a little of what Magyar has done, which is persuade the public that they aren't same tired old group the public has disliked about as much as they are coming to dislike the GOP.

BTW, is " Magyar" running in Hungary is a like a guy named English running for PM in England. Almost too cute, but it is apparently his real name.

Edited 7 hours ago by gehringer_2

[1984Echoes]

12 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

... BTW, is " Magyar" running in Hungary is a like a guy named English running for PM in England. Almost too cute, but it is apparently his real name.

I noticed that.

Magyar WINS in Hungary!!!

Spectacular!!!

[Motown Bombers]

15 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I noticed that.

Magyar WINS in Hungary!!!

Spectacular!!!

We already had Barack America. 

 

[Motown Bombers]

37 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Burns is doing a little click bait here. If you read the article, he's not saying that Orban's defeat is bad for the Dems at all; all he is saying is the same thing everyone and their brother who has looked at the Democratic party Post Obama has said and continues to say, which is that the current national Democratic party is still a mess and can increase its chances substantially  if they can do a little of what Magyar has done, which is persuade the public that they aren't same tired old group the public has disliked about as much as they are coming to dislike the GOP.

BTW, is " Magyar" running in Hungary is a like a guy named English running for PM in England. Almost too cute, but it is apparently his real name.

Yes, Democrats in disarray always gets attention. There's always a circular firing squad on the Dems. The Dems are winning elections left and right and flipping seats and we see these people now come out of the woodwork to lecture Dems on what they need to do. You know why Trump wins? Because Republicans support him. Biden was attacked from both the left and right and thrown under the bus by his own party. Dems constantly go on TV and apologize for being a Dem. 

[Mr.TaterSalad]

I believe Magyars is what Hungarians call themselves. So the literal translation of Peter Magyar's name would be Peter Hungarian.

[oblong]

I have Polish colleagues and there was one who was known by Peter Kielbasa.

I figured they were just ****ing with him to separate him from the other Piotr we had in the group.  Like saying Johnny Bananas

Nope.  That was his name.

 

[1984Echoes]

23 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

I believe Magyars is what Hungarians call themselves. So the literal translation of Peter Magyar's name would be Peter Hungarian.

That's what G2 and I were joking about.

I remember collecting stamps in the early 70's and asking Dad: "Who is the Magyar Republic"?

[romad1]

34 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Yes, Democrats in disarray always gets attention. There's always a circular firing squad on the Dems. The Dems are winning elections left and right and flipping seats and we see these people now come out of the woodwork to lecture Dems on what they need to do. You know why Trump wins? Because Republicans support him. Biden was attacked from both the left and right and thrown under the bus by his own party. Dems constantly go on TV and apologize for being a Dem. 

We lost-in-the-center nevertrumps try to help by not helping too much.  

[The Ronz]

54 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I remember collecting stamps in the early 70's and asking Dad: "Who is the Magyar Republic"?

Magyar Posta

 

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

We lost-in-the-center nevertrumps try to help by not helping too much.  

I read a piece recently that argues that one of the Dem's problems is that in recent years they have tried to build party from policy, instead of building party with a cultural framework, general governing philosophy and letting specific policy flow as a more secondary set of concerns rising from more organically from a wider general constituency. 

While that is a bit of an idealization there is a core of truth in it. At one time you were Democrat because of who you were, a member of a labor union, or a teacher, or an urban minority. At that time Democratic policy grew up out of the concerns of people who already shared some level of a polity. Today they are trying to stitch together constituencies by adopting interest group program objectives, but the problem with being program first is that program is always a double edged sword, even in your own party there are going to be a lot people that don't like the program pushed by this or that sub-sect. The depth to which the Israeli/Arab question splits Dems being an example.

It's understandable how this happened because as the demographics of the Democratic Party have shifted from the working class to the educated class, it was inevitable the older identifications would be lost, but they have not been replaced by anything as durable.

I don't know how to put that more communitarian kind of social structure back together on the left - but it is what the right does have around cultural issues that is part of its recent success. Trumpers share a cultural ID that makes Trumps policy faux pas less damaging to him than the internal arguments over policy on the left seem to be because it's hard to build cohesion that can withstand policy disagreement when there is no unifying ethos beyond policy.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Motown Bombers]

I remember the same people lecturing Dems on what they need to do said anybody but Biden would win. 

[gehringer_2]

40 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I remember the same people lecturing Dems on what they need to do said anybody but Biden would win. 

When the Dems prove they can win on more than just NOT Trump, then tell their critics to shove off. Till then I would say any good advice is in play.

Edited 3 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Motown Bombers]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

When the Dems proves they can win on more than just NOT Trump, then tell their critics to shove off. Till then I would say any good advice is in play.

Dems just won Wisconsin by 20 and have been dominating elections but ok. Keep in mind Trump was the first republican in 20 years to win the popular vote. 

[gehringer_2]

Just now, Motown Bombers said:

Dems just won Wisconsin by 20 and have been dominating elections but ok. Keep in mind Trump was the first republican in 20 years to win the popular vote. 

That's sort of my point though - Until '28 every election is still going to be dominated by the Trump/Anti-Trump split, and if the Dems can't win that easily after the disaster that is Trump's 2nd term, then all you can say is that the US general electorate is an irredeemable lost cause and look for some place to emigrate. But when Trump exits the stage, will Democratic strength dissolve again just like it did between 2020 and 2024? 

I think to a large degree, both parties are ideologically/programmatically exhausted and both are too captured by corporate money. That left the 'mainstream' GOP open to capture by the Trump Cult of Personality in '16. It's just left the Dems arguing with each other whenever they don't have Trump to keep their minds focused.

[Motown Bombers]

17 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

That's sort of my point though - Until '28 every election is still going to be dominated by the Trump/Anti-Trump split, and if the Dems can't win that easily after the disaster that is Trump's 2nd term, then all you can say is that the US general electorate is an irredeemable lost cause and look for some place to emigrate. But when Trump exits the stage, will Democratic strength dissolve again just like it did between 2020 and 2024? 

I think to a large degree, both parties are ideologically/programmatically exhausted and both are too captured by corporate money. That left the 'mainstream' GOP open to capture by the Trump Cult of Personality in '16. It's just left the Dems arguing with each other whenever they don't have Trump to keep their minds focused.

Dem strength didn’t dissolve. They did very well on 2022. 

[gehringer_2]

41 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Dem strength didn’t dissolve. They did very well on 2022. 

If you want to keep calling not having power wining, go for it. They lost the House in 22, then lost the  Senate in 24. Control of no parts of the government on Jan 2025 is zero momentum from the opportunity of having gotten Trump out of the presidency for 4 yrs.

Edited 2 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Motown Bombers]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

If you want to keep calling not having power wining, go for it. Control of no parts of the government on Jan 2025 is zero momentum from the opportunity of having gotten Trump out of the presidency for 4 yrs.

I mean, they expanded their senate majority in 2022. They took the house in 2018. They’ve over performed in every election since 2024. 

[gehringer_2]

2 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I mean, they expanded their senate majority in 2022. They took the house in 2018. They’ve over performed in every election since 2024. 

'Over performed' a pessimistic forecast because of fundamental weakness in so many parts of the country they aren't considered to be on the table? In the Bush admin Gerson coined the phase 'the soft bigotry of low expectations'.  Seems to apply. You can't seriously call yourself a governing party if you consider being completely out of power as doing well.  Are things looking up, well yes, if they weren't it would be political malpractice of the highest order. Now go win something in DC.

[Motown Bombers]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

'Over performed' a pessimistic forecast because of fundamental weakness in so many parts of the country they aren't considered to be on the table? In the Bush admin Gerson coined the phase 'the soft bigotry of low expectations'.  Seems to apply. You can't seriously call yourself a governing party if you consider being completely out of power as doing well.  Are things looking up, well yes, if they weren't it would be political malpractice of the highest order. Now go win something in DC.

Over performed as in beating their previous margins and having one of their highest margins ever in Wisconsin. Seems like they are doing something right. 

[gehringer_2]

44 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Over performed as in beating their previous margins and having one of their highest margins ever in Wisconsin. Seems like they are doing something right. 

Is all hopium until Nov3rd. If they can't swing the Senate to stop more Scotus and Pentagon appointments the country is probably toast. That's the only criteria for 'doing well' that matters.

Edited 1 hour ago by gehringer_2

[Motown Bombers]

13 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Is all hopium until Nov3rd. If they can't swing the Senate to stop more Scotus and Pentagon appointments the country is probably toast. That's the only criteria for 'doing well' that matters.

Winning Supreme Court seats in swing states that are heavy gerrymandered are very important. The Dem got twice as many votes as the Dem who won last time and secured a Dem majority through at least 2030.