On live TV, with Trump standing up there, you think the Speaker of the House is just going to call a snap vote in a chamber they already control and resolve it before the missing members could get back to the chamber? And that such an act would just be accepted as a clever procedural move to avoid the handful of objections in their majority caucus rather than a significant step toward the end of democracy?

Sure, but that’s not relevant at all to this post topic which is about a specific current event and not in any way suggesting storming out of votes.

According to this post, six of the ten are in D+5 districts or better.

They aren’t running votes at the SotU and they can watch his speech in their office perfectly fine, they don’t need to participate in the performance to know what he’s up to.

What the fuck are you talking about, “there are no open statistics”? Of course there are. Do you think we just eyeball the votes? None of this is guesswork and all the numbers are easy to find.

About a third voted for him. I told you that already, but you’re so ignorant to American politics that you took that as a total turnout number. You clearly don’t even have the passing familiarity to ball park the number of voters, so you sure as shit don’t have any concept of what our non voters are like.

They’re not passive Trump supporters or misguided leftists taking a stand. They’re just some combination of ignorant, incurious, and too fucking stressed or lazy to make an effort to cast what is in many states a worthless vote. You’d fit right in with them.

Case in particular is in an incredibly safe district that votes in progressives for other offices, but after winning his initial primary with a plurality he hasn’t had a real challenger despite being a quisling centrist doing performative party-bucking the whole time. Hawaii’s political landscape is just incredibly steeped in backroom politics and an aversion to risk. Case himself was in Congress previously and basically killed his career for a decade by challenging a senator before it was his turn.

One of the big names in state politics just lost to an upstart though, so maybe the cracks are growing.

Ed, middle name Fucking, Case. 😡

That’s just not how you count votes. It wouldn’t be an overwhelming rejection of fascism if 1% more voted for Harris.

And you still didn’t even get the number right, which kind of reinforces how you never actually knew the proportion.

The whole point wasn’t that advertising itself is a failure, it was that political advertising doesn’t operate in the same system and doesn’t have good measures of success. If you hear a stupid jingle every fucking day (in a time people when people watched broadcast TV reliably), when you go to buy toilet paper, something you have to do, you might subconsciously choose the one that feels well established. The advertisers can test their campaign in different markets and validate the results.

But voting isn’t a purchase and isn’t something you have to do but don’t really think about because the options are mostly interchangeable. If an ad annoys you, you can just not vote. You also can’t just test a series of campaigns to see what works because it’s not an ongoing choice. You’re not going to find easily comparable races and if you do you’re not going to abandon one to test a null case, and even if you could the sentiments and candidates are going to change by the time you can implement your findings.

Saying “advertising sells stuff, so it must be good at getting votes” doesn’t make sense. It’s not the same thing.

Yeah, painting Lau as a lion of centrism is when I realized this piece wasn’t actually going to let reality get in the way of its premise. And I’m highly skeptical the DNC, even with Lau, is going to actually right the ship. But pretending his appointment is evidence for such failure is just nonsense. He may not be a savior, but he’s not a sign of doom.

Warren called Gaza a genocide before Bernie did. And publicly criticized Biden’s policies and was party of the group that tried to ban further weapons. “Doesn’t risk upsetting AIPAC.” FFS.

At some point you guys need to accept that there are other progressive politicians rather than just making up a straw man attack that doesn’t align with really. This is just a clown level political fantasy.

BLM didn’t have national organizing and it was the longest protest in American history. What is needed is a spark to convince enough people it’s time, and for those people to sustain so the avalanche grows.

I’m not saying it’s easy or that organizing isn’t important, but we do have a recent sustained protest movement to show that it’s possible.

You seem to have read the first sentence and decided you’d gotten all you need for a reply.

Yeah, you’re still wildly uniformed. Trump got voted in with less than 50% of the vote from something in the vicinity of a third of eligible voters.

Why do people act like the only real workers are oil workers, coal miners, and building contractors? This is a tiny sliver of the workforce.

Do they? We’ve outspent Trump in three elections now and still lost two of them. Is there any actual measure of the value of an ad for political purposes? It’s not like business where you could note an increase in sales after you run an ad campaign, there’s one single opportunity to “buy” and it’s a secret. Anything you learn in that one campaign you just have to hope still applies years later in a different environment with a different candidate.

I’m sure they have some benefit, but the only time I’ve ever seen someone talk about political advertising was either when they were sick of seeing them or when an ad was going viral because regular people were using their social networks to share it.

A motivated voter seriously engaging with their social network is worth a lot more than an ad buy. The whole ad world is trying to smuggle their advertising as the genuine thoughts of a real person and politics is acting like it’s still the age of Must See TV.

For wast majority of Americans capitalist Harris is actually rapid communist comrade Harris.

You don’t seem like you really have a grasp on US politics.

Yeah, but committee seats are where the establishment has explicit power. It’s easy to connect establishment whims with that very same establishment electing their choice. It’s a huge stretch to extend that to them dictating the votes of millions of people.

It was her perpetual problem too. She’d start out with energetic support for progressive policies, get momentum, and then a few days later (presumably after talking with advisors and donors) clarify that actually she didn’t mean it and what she really wanted was strictly limited neoliberalism. It’s why she failed in the 2020 primary and I wish she learned something from that.