Raze

You have no idea how these polls work. Somewhat support is always counted into support. The poll itself does this. All polls that tell you how many support a proposal do this. Your quoted source is asking from among many different options and single payer is still the most popular one. That doesn’t mean only 35% support it, many may prefer something else ideally but will still support it over the alternative given.

Trump just had a in person meeting with Mamdani. Despite previously calling him a dangerous communist, and Mamdani during the meeting saying yes when asked if trump is fascist and accusing Israel of genocide, Trump mostly ignored this and was very warm and friendly towards him Interestingly most democrats in congress just voted on a measure to condemn socialism, whereas in this meeting Trump a fault said he’d be fine living in New York governed by the democratic socialist Mamdani

Because we are discussing winning elections. No, you are supposed to add up strongly support with regular support for overall support. Ok, here’s another one https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/econTabReport_haeOEK5.pdf What you’re saying makes no sense. There are many different issues and it’s job for the democrat leadership to get the rest to fall in line and if they don’t apply pressure.

Irrelevant, they are popular federal programs. That is 36% who strongly support, 29% also somewhat support, totaling 65% Your poll is from years ago and also says the other 58% say they support a public option. Which Biden ran on then never attempted to pass. If you can’t pass something you won running on which has 58% support you are incompetent. Trump literally gets republicans and some democrats to regularly vote for things 70% of Americans are against.

So you think the new deal, social security, Medicare, public school, obamacare, were all mistakes that hurt the left? https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/11/medicare-for-all-is-popular-even-when-put-up-against-attacks

- I didn’t say single payer, I said public option - the US is far wealthier than the other countries that have single payer, the idea we couldn’t do it makes no sense - Because state based changes are different from federal based changes, some things cannot be done unless from a top down level - by your logic we should have never done a single federal program because it should just come from a city level - The president can apply pressure to get votes for something, if you can’t pass a popular proposal you are incompetent. Biden simply never wanted to and just lied about supporting public option because he knew it would help him get elected.

There is nothing fanatical about programs that are less extreme than ones successfully implemented in Canada, the UK, etc. Biden himself implemented some so called fanatical programs like the child credit but let them run out while people got wrecked from inflation making his position worse. Biden even ran on things like the public option because he knew it was popular, but just didn’t follow through.

Because if he does a strike and nothing changes or it gets worse that would be a show of weakness. His advisors told him doing that would make Iran ramp up killings and israel said they don’t think a strike is enough to collapse the country as of now.

Note: (this post is NOT about Clavicular, please do not remove it for being a repost as he just is incidentally in the interaction, the focus is the others in interaction) The PUA John Anthony Lifestyle and self help guru Owen Cook both ran into the recently viral controversial streamer Clavicular. But what ended up happening is it gave us a great example of the difference between weak frame and strong frame. This is a hard thing to grasp for guys learning to improve their game, so it’s a great test to see. Here is John’s interaction: Here is Owen’s interaction (first minute and 30 seconds of this video, you can stop watching after it) The difference could not be starker and could not better show how weak vs strong frames behave in the wild. In Owen’s case notice his entire vibe is in some ways flippant, jokey, and relaxed, he clearly does not care and is just having his own fun. However at the same time he is engaged, as a result you can see Clavicular and his friends acknowledge him and show respect. Despite being polar opposites he maintains his own authority but without stepping on their toes and triggering a backlash. But compare that to John. Right away he goes in with a combative frame, but pathetically he crumbles at the slightest pushback and immediately tries qualifying himself by bragging about his lay count. Clavicular and his friends laugh in his face at how stupid and pathetic he is. Another thing to notice is his wife, as the interaction progresses her body language turns away from John and she starts getting closer to Clavicular and his friends, smiling at them and reaching towards them. This is because women subconsciously register who is the person seeking validation in an interaction and who they are seeking it from and register that person as the dominant leader and immediately feel more drawn to them. In this case Johns own wife is subconsciously repulsed by the pathetic behavior of a almost 40 year old man desperately qualifying himself to random punk 19 year olds on the street. John then makes it worse by actually following them to talk more. He now claims he didn’t realize who clavicular was, this makes it even more pathetic because it means he wasn’t even qualifying himself to a internet celebrity but actually who he thought was some random punk kid. Though in his defense he’s probably lying. He basically begs for a collaboration at that point and they finally give him it so he leaves, then they mock him behind his back as he drives away. Conclusion: This demonstrates how a weak frame or strong frame behaves in the wild. In both cases they are emerging from the mindset and emotional state of the person. John Anthony for years has constantly trashed Owen and mocked him trying to imply he is socially weaker than him, often touting his supposed lay count. But with this we can see really it is his immense inner insecurity and jealousy with the attacks being a desperate attempt to save face.

The simplest moral standard is you are responsible for what you are implicated in. Western countries arm Israel’s war crimes and repression, they don’t arm Irans.

Both are true. Socialists failed to sell themselves in many ways, However incompetence isn’t just about winning, there are other factors. If there is an election between a candidate who polls at 1% and another who polls at 99%, then the result is 49% and 51% respectively, the loser was far more competent than the winner who bungled his lead. Still not enough to overcome the odds. Sanders fought an uphill battle and gained ground but lost. Democrats had the advantage and screwed it up.

Not at all. The US and Europe not only arm israel but engage in trade, give aid, provide diplomatic cover. Their support maintains it. The US and Europe do nothing of the sort regarding Iran and go as far as massively sanctioning not just the government but the entire economy. There did seem to be more support during the 2022 Iranian protests yes. I suspect less now because the left is focused on domestic issues & dislike trump and Israels foreign policy actions in the past two years and associate them with the Iranian uprising since they inserted themselves into it.

This is basic reasoning

Depends on the ideal possibilities of success and how closely they got to them.

No, they just did so in an incompetent fashion. Same with many aspects of their governance, hence turning voters against them. Like what republicans are doing now.

To do what? They voted for who they wanted and got it.

They already tried and failed. Now he’s way too popular, unless his tenure as mayor fails.

The only reason you are defending the democrats is because at some point they persuaded you, but somehow you deny the relevance of persuading others in a system which power is awarded though votes (in each state). Ironic.

So the Michelin star restaurant should not consider adopting the winning strategy McDonald’s uses but instead just declare it is everyone who didn’t buy from thems fault and let their business tank and go out of business? Congrats your business failed and no one cares. I wonder if you’d maintain this belief if we invested your life savings in a business. Would you sit on your high horse like this or would you suggest they actually try to convince customers to buy? By your logic everyone should just stop donating to democrats and they shouldn’t even bother campaigning. Since it’s everyone else’s job to just vote for them.

No I just have capacity for nuance and basic logic. This doesn’t conflict with anything I’m saying. Democrats are just getting lucky their opposition is shooting itself in the foot.

In a competitive market it is up to the producer to persuade consumers. Imagine two people start companies, one focuses on convincing people to buy from them, the other whines that it’s the peoples job to come buy from him. You literally brought up McDonald’s yourself which is an example of this. McDonald’s wins because they persuade. Imagine if McDonald’s only ever just expected people to buy from them because it’s their job, they would have gone out of business a long time ago. Hutch and his ilk never use this blame the voters logic when the side they don’t like loses! It’s just sour grapes because their beloved establishment democrats and their strategies failed but he doesn’t want to fundamentally question why.

McDonald’s sells more than any other restaurant precisely for this reason. Its called acknowledging reality. McDonald’s knows that what matters is taking ownership and marketing to get people in the door. A good restaurant can complain people don’t appreciate them all they want, no one cares. If you run a restaurant and you want it to succeed you don’t just expect people to know, you market and persuade. The entire point of elections is for candidates to persuade the public. If they fail to persuade the public, that’s on them. Just complaining about the voters is stupid, if you can’t get the voters on your side you should resign and put someone in your position who can, that’s the purpose of campaigning. Notice how Hutch and his ilk never use this blame the voters logic when the side they don’t like loses, then it’s that they are just wrong and would need to change how they do things to succeed.

How is Huberman charismatic? He just summarizes research papers and science facts in an important sounding voice. He gets girls because he’s famous and tall.

Yes voters are adults, and the purpose of elections is for politicians to get voters to vote for them, If they fail the politician failed. What you’re saying is like if a restaurant goes out of business and blames people for not eating at it. It is the restaurants responsibility to bring customers, if it failed to do so it will fail.

That’s not how it works. The job of politicians is to inspire people to vote for them. If the politicians can’t do that they failed, not the voters.