Vee

On that I agree. We keep telling these people the language and approach are wrong and they don't want to hear it. I think a lot of progressive initiatives are worthwhile and worth pursuing, but if you can't sell it you can't make shít happen. Anything approaching the word 'socialism' is radioactive in this country and will remain that for at least a couple more generations. Police de-escalation, demilitarization is a lot better to work with than acting like you want to abolish the cops. We can deliver policies on par with shared liberal goals and call them different things. Incredible:

Doesn't matter. Perception is reality with some of these things. Another good point made on the Dem call: Pascrell said Schumer is a problem for them, leaving Pelosi doing a good job but "with one hand tied behind her back". IMO that's right. Schumer is a good man but weak.

Trump and Bush both called these numbers a mandate, sometimes without the Congress or the Senate. We can too.

Pelosi disagreed with her. I see both points of view; she's right that that rhetoric hurt a lot of moderates and has to be reworked and rebranded in how we talk about de-militarizing the police, etc. But what gets Spanberger elected in a red state is not the issue or chosen cause of every Dem across the nation in very different places, and Spanberger needs to recognize that. I'm very glad she held her seat, but I'm tired of moderates demanding the party always hew to them first and last. They have to meet us halfway too. That doesn't mean I'm remotely interested in hewing to the goals of, say, the Squad, because I think only Pressley and AOC have made strides to mature, but I still think the party needs to be prepared to take names and kick ass. Fight for our issues, don't run from them just because of our red state members. Give them room to moderate locally. But the only thing the GOP and their less committed swing voters respect is strength or the appearance thereof. When Trump and Bush won with numbers like what we're now facing, they called it a mandate and walked tall, and the media believed it. We have to do that. We have to be forceful and we have to take it to them. Pelosi did also say it flat out: "Joe Biden has a mandate." Good. Meanwhile:

The GA remaining numbers are razor-thin but based on what I am seeing Biden can take it. It will be very close but I believe it. Call it.

Thread:

No one in their bench has the raw power he has with that base, and the built-in TV recognition. That's their problem going forward.

Whoa! @marceline @JaneAusten

Exactly. I don't believe this country will be ready for Kamala in four years. Not after what we've been through, and not after what these people did. It's surprised me before, you never know. But I think eight is a better shot.

No one could've won this election against Trump but Joe. No one. I suspected that a while back, but the nailbiters of this week - which, it seems, we will now win by a very healthy margin as opposed to the dark slim forecast once expected two nights ago - proved it. I was proud to vote for Elizabeth Warren but she would've been slaughtered. Bernie would've been a shitshow nightmare from summer to now. Trump worship is a cult that crosses social and in some cases ethnic lines, on misogyny, on masculinity, on racism. And as long as he was in play, we were going to need Joe Biden, an everyman, to counter him. And thank God for him. Am I happy it came down to another safe str8 white man to take down a white man? No. But I understand it better than I did four years ago. We have a long way to go, and Joe is a good man, and Kamala has a great future.

I don't agree with a lot of this dude's stuff, but this is very true:

Trumpism was here long before Trump. It was always going to be here after. Cutting off the head of the snake just helps to begin to put them back in their place and work on breeding them out. I'll laugh at him losing and bleeding out slow like a wounded dog as long as I like. He won't run again.

Wow. From Fox:

God, just not having to see or hear from or about him everyday will be so healing.

Speaking of Sanders: I have my doubts. Trump has zero work ethic, loyalty to the GOP, stamina or interest in anything beyond himself. He is bored with politics, and now dejected and deeply wounded. His rallies will wind down with smaller numbers soon enough; he'll try a big grift operation, but like so many of his other attempts at business ventures it will flop. Plus he's got pending cases against him. I think he'll go back into the Palin wilderness in 18 months, maybe less. He'll want to retreat to safe havens. Further, the id he represents for the GOP voters has always existed without him. And they hate a loser.

I've liked McCaskill in the past, but I (and I think Carl too) found her statement tin-eared, offensive and playing into a lot of the same stuff both the media and Bernie regularly pushed re: dismissing social issues. So while AOC's or Parker Malloy's words may be harsh I agree with a lot of what they and others have said on that point. A lot of people I know took offense to that, not just Ocasio-Cortez. I think there is something to be said for modulating approach, but not playing into a right wing narrative. Meanwhile: Rick Santorum, of all people, just said on CNN that Biden has likely won PA, which is no surprise to me. LOL, try it:

He's taken both. It's just a question of calling it. Chuck Todd kept trying to dog on Fox and AP's AZ call and suggest Trump can still win it. He's been getting dragged for the last day or so.