HauntedBySpectacle [he/him, comrade/them]

Gretchen Whitmer is probably the most likeable, somewhat recognizable person they could run. She’s still a centrist, but had some halfway decent policies as governor. I imagine the DNC would see her see as a compromise with the “progressive” wing, bullshit as that may be. That could be exactly what stops them from picking her, though. Also she’s a woman. On the other hand, there was the whole kidnapping plot which if they were smart, they could really milk as proof of Trump being a threat to democracy, their favorite talking point. I think she’s the high profile dem who would be perceived most favorably next to Trump. Shes also from the Midwest, which has all the key swing states they need to win, including her own. Gavin Newsom, the runner up, has name recognition, but he also has sleazy used car salesman vibes. Kamala would eat shit

True crime as a genre is enough to explain this one

Glowing was coined by Terry Davis, the same guy who made TempleOS. He used it in the sense of “CIA n***** glow in the dark”

Spook is way older as an antiblack slur, but that’s never been the primary meaning.

It’s future fodder for libs to claim tankies are proud genocide deniers who use genocidal language in the same manner as Nazis.

I think it’s a lot more sus than “glowie” or “spook”, which have uses much more clearly divorced from their racist origins, but a lot of us have given those up regardless. (I don’t really care about using these either way, but I am not marginalized, so I avoid them. Not my call)

Not that I’m aware of. IMO, it’s not our best appropriation of fash memes when it comes to o p t i c s

I fell into the despair pit in high school, so I got ahead of the curve

Chapo had it right when they said that the really poor by and large just don’t vote. From liberals’ perspective that’s the same thing as voting Republican in effect, but they don’t reflect on being resented for this snobbish disapproval and political entitlement, which costs them elections.

Excellent post.

This is exactly why, throughout the entire Trump presidency, liberals repeated to themselves, to their family, friends coworkers, to their Twitter followers: THIS IS NOT NORMAL. It was a mantra for 4 years. It perfectly represents their struggle through the cognitive dissonance of reconciling Donald Trump being the “Leader of the Free World” just as much as Barack Obama, Lyndon Johnson, or Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The question they never could answer satisfyingly is “If this is not normal, how did normal lead us here?” Answering this question definitively inevitably leads to socialist critiques and conclusions. Instead they retreated into the elitism of disdain for “populism” and the idiot masses, while simultaneously claiming to defend “democracy” even though they clearly don’t like its actual practice and results. Or, they retreated into the paranoia of a foreign conspiracy, since a foreign nation can be irredeemably evil but never our own, while completely overlooking that Trump mostly did as the Blob (as Obama called it) wanted. He was of absolutely no benefit to any supposed backers, even if they really did support him. And it stands to reason that if they could have rigged it successfully the first time, why wouldn’t it have worked the second time? It should have only gotten easier to rig things with a puppet in charge than with a meaningfully independent Democrat in charge. All of their answers were and are a mess of contradictions.

I was like you too. Recognizing that this madness was normal and continues to proceed just fine without Trump at its head is exactly what showed me that I am not a liberal. I would have hoped it would have enough for most people. Maybe we need Mecha Hitler III to be elected via Supreme Court decision before most liberals jump ship.