Hardkill

That’s very true. It’s not fair or right. If it wasn’t for the dominance of the growing right-wing media and alternative, most of the mainstream media not fighting back right wing extremism, and the growing division in our country then the left and the Democrats wouldn’t keep losing the messaging war.

Former Democrats turned Independents such as Joe Manchin and Chris Cuomo say that they left the party because of how “extreme, partisan, and crazy” the Democratic Party has gotten like the Republican Party has in its own way. I fear this tragic event could give more ammunition to the idea that both parties are equally bad and other asinine false equivalencies.

Oh yeah true. lol

Yet, some prominent figures leading the military have been left-leaning. TR was a military war hero who didn't mind putting up a fight if need be. He even killed several enemy soldiers himself in combat. Woodrow Wilson was forced to lead the country in WW1 to help the Allied Powers defeat the Central Powers. FDR was forced to lead the country in WWII to help the Allied Powers defeat the Axis Powers. LBJ put our country into full-blown combat mode in Vietnam, which turned out to be one of the deadliest and probably the most disastrous war in the history of our country. All four of those presidents were arguably the 4 most progressive presidents in the history of the country. Plus, all of them, along with Truman, who was another prominent liberal president, were responsible for upgrading our entire national security state, including our military, in such revolutionary ways. Don't forget that JFK, who was a liberal icon, and Jimmy Carter, who had several liberal beliefs himself, were proud members of the US Navy.

Yeah, I think that the majority of the military and law enforcement don't really like Trump, but uncomfortably support him because the majority of them are conservative-leaning individuals and given the extreme political polarization our country is going through in this day and age most of them feel like it's always better to vote Republican than Democrat in any given election, because clearly the Republican party is the only party today that strongly stands for conservatism and American traditions.

True. Though: However, I think that the Democratic party has gone too far to the left on social issues, while still being too much to the right on economic issues for decades, despite having shifted more and more back to New Deal style economic stances since the election of Obama in 2008 and the rise of the progressive movement in the mid 2010s.

This is another reason why I miss the 1990s.

This may have never happened had the US had much better gun control laws like the peer developed nations do.

Holy shit! I can’t believe I am saying this now, but as much as I hate this guy I actually don’t want him to die. This is so horrific. However, I knew that something like this would eventually happen to someone on their side because of their right wing extremism including their belief in absolute gun rights.

and what about the fact that there are still too many moderates and Independent voters who supported Trump in 2024?

I just read the blog on Social Influencer Corruption. I agree the influencer space is ripe for abuse—opaque funding, NDAs, and pay-to-push politics wreck trust. Plus, it really has contributed to the widespread brain rotting in our country. But if the Left refuses to build a competitive creator operation while the Right scales theirs, we’re unilaterally disarming in the new media battlefield. Also: while mainstream media has better accountability/reporting than alternative media, much of it was complicit in normalizing Trump (2016 & 2024). These are profit-driven corporations that explicitly frame themselves as running a business—not guardians of democracy. You know that and you've talked about that before a number of times. They’re not natural allies of Democrats or the Left (maybe MSNBC is the closest exception) and they can't stop themselves with their constant bothsideism My stance: Don’t abstain. Fight fire with clean fire—run an influencer program with hard rules so audiences can calibrate trust instead of losing it. Guardrails (non-negotiable): Radical transparency: clear on-screen funding labels; monthly public funder logs. Speech independence: no message vetoes or gag clauses; creators can criticize “their own side.” Accountability: independent ethics audits each cycle; fast disclosure of contracts if challenged. Quality: offer fact-checking help; require visible, time-stamped corrections. Politics is coalition-building under constraint. History shows you sometimes partner with imperfect actors to beat worse outcomes—but you do it with rules. If abstinence cedes the field, what’s the workable alternative? Which transparency standards would keep a funded creator credible to you? Where are the red lines (e.g., no foreign money, no astroturf, no deepfakes)? I remember you saying a few years ago about how even pompous and very bothersome progressives whom I can't stand anymore like Cenk are still trying to fight back against the greater evils: Also, that woman, Taylor Lorenz gives me TYT vibes, which again I am getting sick and tired of, and she doesn't even seem to have impressive academic credentials herself.

Imagine working hard and honestly for over 30 years, only to earn next to nothing, and now you’re starving through no fault of your own. Then along comes some robber baron who wants to drain the very soul out of you by exploiting you as a slave for only $7 an hour. You have no choice but to work literally every hour of every day—including weekends—just to barely survive, or even then, still not make ends meet at all. Now multiply this by millions of people across the country who have been going through the same struggle for years, utterly betrayed by the false promises of "capitalism free from the government" and the so-called “American Dream.”

Yeah, that's the feeling that I've gotten with her. I don't like how she seems to be okay with people like the Tate brothers. Then again, I am not that surprised.

Hey OP, How have you been holding up lately?

Will several millions of people on Earth inevitably die from this climate change crisis? Progressives are very upset with establishment Dems for not seriously tackling this issue many years ago.

I know. But centrists are going to have to compromise as well as by accepting enough support from leftists in order to win many elections. Moreover, if leftists and centrists can't ever put aside their differences to unite, then how are they ever going to gain back real power again and stop both right-wing authoritarianism and the wealthy oligarchs from taking over this country before it's too late?

Yeah.... However, the centrist/corporate/establishment Dems can't continue to squash or ignore the growing left-wing supporters in the country forever. Otherwise, they will eventually lose too many big elections.

I find it odd that Democrats claim to be a big-tent party—welcoming center-right, centrist, center-left, and left-wing voters—while today’s Republican Party largely embraces only the right and far-right, with few true center-right voices. Yet the Democratic Party often tries to undermine Democratic Socialists.

I was aware of it months ago. They always said that Chorus was about putting together a mega network of Democratic aligned influencers to help fight against Trump, MAGA, the radical right-wing, and the Republican party.

Pakman has interviewed Leftists like Cenk, Noam Chomsky, and Hasan Piker. He seems to be genuinely aligned with their viewpoints. BTC has interviewed and supported Bernie Sanders and AOC. Guys like them are pragmatists who have a realistic understanding of how politics and business work, but also seem to be committed to fighting for our democracy, freedoms/rights, and progress. Pakman made a fair point when he said that the progress of human society happens incrementally to varying degrees even when you look at FDR's New Deal.

I thought David Pakman and BTC were the kind of sensible, pragmatic, and mature progressives that you approved of as opposed to the far leftists who are too whiny, too populist, and too anti-mainstream like TYT or Hasan or Breaking Points? Also, what about the fact that BTC also works with Pod Save America, another one of your favorite high-quality, wise, and balanced left-wing channels out there? In fact, all of the Pod Save America bros have been part of the idea of building up their left-wing/progressive media ecosystem including getting Democratic aligned wealthy donors to fund their project for it.

So, then who will we be able to trust as new sources? If we are stuck in these libertarian fantasies for the rest of our lives, then how will Democrats and progressives be able to effectively push their anti-oligarchy and economic populist message when independent private actors will be corrupted by such wealthy/corporate donors and dark money?

Yes, no one perfect. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be human. Good people have always had to pick the lesser of two or more evils on every matter since the dawn of mankind. Btw, isn’t it possible that once independent media gets large enough and prevalent enough that enough people will demand new regulations, standards, and laws for them in order to sustain some semblance of order and so that they are held accountable?

This is another reason why I miss the 1990s, because that decade was the golden era of democracy in America.

You (and folks like Cenk Uygur and Dan Pfeiffer) have argued for years that mainstream media’s business model (ratings, access, advertisers, owners) warps coverage—sometimes in anti-progressive, pro-establishment ways. Given that, how do you compare MSM’s profit pressures to the new influencer funding you’re warning about? Specific things I’m hoping you’ll weigh in on: Risk comparison: In your view, what makes MSM’s corporate incentives less/more/equally corrupting than dark-money/party-aligned creator programs? What are the distinct failure modes of each? Minimum standards (MSM vs. creators): If you won’t endorse “ops,” would you endorse a cross-arena baseline—for both MSM and influencers—like on-screen funding labels, public corrections logs, independence clauses, and annual third-party audits? Consumer guidance: Practically, how should a viewer triangulate trust when both arenas are profit-driven? What signals (habits, disclosures, behavior under criticism) make an outlet or creator trustworthy enough to follow? Accountability levers: What non-activist reforms would you support that raise the epistemic floor industry-wide (e.g., a public registry of political funding/contracts across MSM and creator ecosystems)? On Cenk/Pfeiffer’s critique: Do you think their MSM-is-profit-first critique is directionally right, and if so, what concrete fixes (short of “don’t watch”) actually change incentives? Not asking you to run propaganda—just trying to pin down your sense-maker’s minimum for a media environment where money is everywhere.