Hardkill

Tell that to the great liberal/progressives like TR, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Truman, JFK/LBJ, Obama, and Biden, all of whom saved and dramatically improved our country in many dimensions. What about the civil rights leaders like MLK and Malcolm X, the women's rights movement, and the gay rights movement?

If we don't get a handle on both this terrible media landscape and political environment we are in, then even the youngest generations of people in every developed nation will succumb to living in an Orwellian dystopia for God knows how long.

Well, this probably never would've happened had America had the very same kind of gun control laws that all other developed nations have.

Well, I can say from my own experience, that people can't live on looks alone. Men, especially more so than women, have to do more than look pretty to succeed in life.

How can conservative/Republican officials in a safe red state ever be held accountable for their terrible policies? Why don't people in red states, especially in the poorest red states, feel like their state-level officials are letting them down even in education, healthcare access, economic opportunities, environmental infrastructure, crime, etc.?

I never thought that a very young girl, especially one who was pretty, would commit a school shooting. It's crazy how there was already a young, attractive-looking man who made national headlines for killing someone with a gun, and then just a few weeks later, a young, attractive-looking girl also made national headlines for killing more than one person with a gun. It must be part of some kind of fad going on where more and more people are trying to get a lot of attention through the news after being influenced by what they see in violent movies/shows and news stories of previous mass shootings.

Well, there are still more racists amongst those 40 and over than those under 40 years old. However, apparently there was about a 12-point swing from voting Democrat in 2020 to voting Republican in 2024 amongst the youngest cohort, 18–24 year-olds. I never thought this would happen, especially with Trump in the 2024 election.

Yeah, but what about the fact that a lot of young people have gotten seduced by MAGA and have gotten their brains rotted by the internet/social media more than many of us thought possible?

Not to mention that even all of the hottest looking celebrities didn't just win the genetic lottery. Almost all of them have also had a ton of work done on their bodies and faces, surgically. Plus, don't forget all of the makeup all of the female celebrities constantly put on along with the top-notch editing done on every professional photo they take and in every film they are in.

What will be Bernie's legacy when he passes away? I understand that progress doesn't happen as fast as many of us want. However, what did Bernie Sanders really accomplish for the country? None of his policies and ideas will ever get enacted in our lifetimes and he was in great partly responsible for the election of Trump in 2016 thanks to his whole widespread "Bernie or bust" effect. So, then there is: Correct me, if I am wrong, but it seems like even Leo has been suggesting that he lately has come to the realization that he was wrong about that. I liked Emerald about progress in the long-run: Yet, even if enough people finally begin to realize what a disaster Trumpism is, it might already be too late to fix all of the unfathomable damage that will be done to this country and perhaps every bit of progress ever made in this country since the 1930s will have been erased by Trumpism. Also, the country will still elect another center-left Democrat for president. Also, attacking, neoliberalism, centrism, and corporate Democrats backfires. So, in the end, was Sander's movement a complete failure and should progressives and Democrats move back to the center for the next 1 to 5 decades?

So, attacking neoliberalism, centrism, and corporate Democrats is inevitable even though Leo doesn't like it when hard left-wingers attack those mainstream politicians or ideologies. You think that Democrats may shift back more to the right or center, but only temporarily during these next 4 years, before they swing again towards liberalism/leftism/progressivism more than ever before?

Well, yeah, top-down Democratic policies won't force the red states to change their overall ideology from conservativism to centrism or liberalism quickly. However, we can't deny that they've always worked to make real progress for those states' economy, physical infrastructure, human rights, opportunities, access to various essential resources, etc.

Like Tulsi Gabbard, she also betrayed the Left.

So, what do you think the red states will need to no longer be dominated by conservative ideology?

I see what you're saying. Otherwise, it will have to come from either top-down Democratic control at the federal level or from grassroots campaigning or ballot measures. Combating the right-wing propaganda in those states would also be of terrific help. I also just remembered that we need to wait for a lot more educated folk and more non-whites to migrate from blue states to red states as well.

That's crazy! During the 1600s, 1700, 1800s, 1900s, the aughts, and even to some extent during the 2010s, all of those same red states kept improving significantly in the long-run. I even pray that if none of the laws that Biden and the Democrats in Congress passed ever get repealed then those policies will actually continue developing all of those red states tremendously in so many ways for many years. Are you saying that those states have now reached a dead end forever? Okay, these are the ways I think any more real progress can be made in those parts of the country are: During times when the Democrats control both chambers of Congress and the presidency simultaneously and enact serious liberal/progressive-leaning policies? The passage of liberal/progressive-leaning ballot measures in those states grassroots movements that can pressure their state and local level elected officials to enact liberal/progressive-leaning policies How about all of that?

I know, but then how do they ever get to a point where they're like "That's it! This isn't working anymore! Where done with our Republican/conservatives!"? and how do those states ever improve their public education, healthcare access, economic opportunities, environmental infrastructure, crime, etc.?

Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot about that qualification you made in that post. Yeah, I figured she would more likely do the fringe horseshoe way, which is what Cenk has also been doing for years. Both them mistakenly believe that both the "left wing populists and right wing populists will be able to take on the establishment together."

Generally, when things get really bad enough at the national level under the watch of either the Democratic party or the Republican party, then the people vote the politician(s) and his/her party out of the White House, the US Senate, and/or the US House. However, that hasn't really happened at the state level, in most congressional districts, in most state legislative districts, and in many cities throughout the US since around 2010 because of how increasingly polarized our country has gotten. So, even if say a Democratic governor in a blue state does a terrible job of governing his/her state, that politician will either be re-elected or be replaced by another Democrat in the next election. Conversely, if say a Republican governor in a red state does a terrible job of governing his/her state, then that politician will either be re-elected or be replaced by another Republican in the next election. How terrible do things in a certain state, district, or city have to get for voters in that respective area of the country to finally vote out the party in power or vote the party out of power to be in charge of the area? Don't voters in Mississippi, which is one of the reddest states and the poorest state in the country, feel betrayed by their leaders for not taking care of the problems in their state that desperately need to be addressed such as education, infrastructure, the economy, healthcare, crime, etc. What about people in blue states? Couldn't there be a point where people in those states get sick and tired of Democrats or liberals being in charge of the state?

With all due respect, so much for your take that Ana was moving on to stage Yellow. Even though she claims to no longer be a part of "the Left" and still believes in all reasonable progressive policies, she is still bitching a lot about the Democratic party never being good enough, still has very unrealistic ideas about how to replace the whole system, and naively believes that there's a real shot that progressives and MAGA can work together to take down the whole establishment. She's still no different than Cenk. I am certainly not at full stage Yellow myself, but as far as I am concerned, I don't see how she will ever develop into a true stage Yellow individual anytime soon.

I hope our country doesn’t have another 9/11 or enter into another forever war during these next 4 years. Our country’s national security will be more vulnerable to foreign enemies than I can remember.

What do you say to those who say that Trump got elected again because the majority of the country is angry at the establishment and the status quo? So, are things with the anti-mainstream media outlets going to keep getting worse before they ever get better?

Well, what do you expect from a 2nd world country like Argentina? I don't think it's economy is as developed as Brazil's economy is. Argentina's economy reminds me of Turkey's economy.

It's also because of a couple of other major reasons: 1. The Argentina central bank's interest rates were historically high around last year and during the earlier part of this year. This has greatly decreased the aggregate demand in the country. 2. The lingering effects of the COVID-19 Global supply chain shocks have been greatly subsiding year over year. This has greatly replenished the aggregate supply in the country to probably relatively normal levels. When aggregate demand doesn't exceed the aggregate supply in the country then you have low inflation overall. This is because there is no upward pressure on prices. In this situation, the demand for goods and services is in balance with the supply, so businesses do not feel the need to increase prices. Now, what happens when there's more supply than demand in the economy? Well, it can put downward pressure on prices, leading to low inflation or even deflation. In this situation, businesses might lower their prices to encourage people to buy their products, since there's a surplus of goods and services. As a result, the overall price level can drop, causing inflation to fall way below target levels – or even become negative, which is basically deflation. It's worth mentioning that these economic concepts were the true main reasons that the US got out of the stagflation mess that lasted from the 70s to the early 80s. By around 1983, the country had finally recovered, and here's the thing: the idea that Reagonomics, which was implemented during Reagan's first term, was the magic solution that saved us from stagflation is very misleading and largely a lie. The only thing from Reagonomics that I believe actually worked to help reduce inflation in our country over time was the significant increase in free trade. Even then, much of Reagan's policy on free trade, which has stuck with us for decades greatly contributed to the decades-long growing economic inequality in our country. I wouldn't be surprised if that's what also happens in Argentina in the long-run because of Milei's policies. There needs to be both free and fair trade.

Sadly, all of that is inevitable. We already are going to live through one of the darkest times in US History. Millions upon millions of Americans are already either going to die or suffer beyond what we can imagine during Trump's 2nd. presidency. You know that. I really don't see any other way for us to get out of the darkness that's coming besides putting up a fight we haven't seen since the 1800s.