Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why do you think San Fran has gone sharply rightward?

As someone who has lived in or near San Francisco for most of my life, it’s because under progressive governance the city became an absolute disaster across all fronts: homelessness, cost of living, high taxes but bad social services (unless you are homeless, in which case it’s golden), crime and lack of enforcement, destruction of education, impossibility of building new housing, regulatory hellscape, a school board that was insane (and was recalled in this right-ward shift), and yes, even in SF, extreme positions on gender issues.

The city has traditionally been a jewel, but under progressive rule became truly awful. The progressives were loud but in many respects aren’t representative of the city, and Lurie’s unmistakable shift to the right is very popular with SF voters other than the extreme left.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why are Republicans so obsessed with sex and genitalia? It’s all you morons ever talk about. Meanwhile Trump is torpedoing America’s middle class and wrecking our standing in the world. But no, let’s talk about which track team your spawn should be allowed to join.

Because women’s rights to safe and sex segregated spaces are important, that’s why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why do you think San Fran has gone sharply rightward?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why are Republicans so obsessed with sex and genitalia? It’s all you morons ever talk about. Meanwhile Trump is torpedoing America’s middle class and wrecking our standing in the world. But no, let’s talk about which track team your spawn should be allowed to join.

I’m a lifelong California Democrat, you idiot.

And you are losing. Badly. Between homelessness, trans, and education, California progressives are despised here. Nobody believes the progressives care one bit about the middle class. Nobody believes the Democrats care about our global standing when they sent Biden out on the world stage and lied about his competence. Nobody believes you.

You are losing badly here.

The odds of California going Republican in 2028 are about 0.1%. And I grew up in California, so don't lecture me on who is "losing" idiot. And if you are so upset about basic human rights for trans people, then go vote for Trump at age 82.

Ex-Californians are always the most ignorant about what is going on in the state. Your mental model is thirty years old and it shows. You are too dumb to understand how out of touch you are, I’m sure.

And I’m not just talking about the presidential election. I am talking about a rightward shift across the whole state that is generational. Everyone in California except for a few wealthy university kids and rich suburban moms hates the progressives. When the progressive brand is so toxic that they’ve lost San Francisco, something significant is afoot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why are Republicans so obsessed with sex and genitalia? It’s all you morons ever talk about. Meanwhile Trump is torpedoing America’s middle class and wrecking our standing in the world. But no, let’s talk about which track team your spawn should be allowed to join.

I’m a lifelong California Democrat, you idiot.

And you are losing. Badly. Between homelessness, trans, and education, California progressives are despised here. Nobody believes the progressives care one bit about the middle class. Nobody believes the Democrats care about our global standing when they sent Biden out on the world stage and lied about his competence. Nobody believes you.

You are losing badly here.

The odds of California going Republican in 2028 are about 0.1%. And I grew up in California, so don't lecture me on who is "losing" idiot. And if you are so upset about basic human rights for trans people, then go vote for Trump at age 82.

Democrats should announce they will eject that Congressman who calls McBride 'Mr.'

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why are Republicans so obsessed with sex and genitalia? It’s all you morons ever talk about. Meanwhile Trump is torpedoing America’s middle class and wrecking our standing in the world. But no, let’s talk about which track team your spawn should be allowed to join.

I’m a lifelong California Democrat, you idiot.

And you are losing. Badly. Between homelessness, trans, and education, California progressives are despised here. Nobody believes the progressives care one bit about the middle class. Nobody believes the Democrats care about our global standing when they sent Biden out on the world stage and lied about his competence. Nobody believes you.

You are losing badly here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Why are Republicans so obsessed with sex and genitalia? It’s all you morons ever talk about. Meanwhile Trump is torpedoing America’s middle class and wrecking our standing in the world. But no, let’s talk about which track team your spawn should be allowed to join.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

And this is why Californian politicians aren't viewed favorably nationally. They're all lumped in with one another in being viewed as too liberal. Dem politicians in swing states are much more moderate and therefore have a much better chance of success nationally. This same dynamic exists in the GOP. There is no way in heck an evangelically extreme conservative politician from Mississippi is going to fare well nationally.

San Francisco (!) has already gone sharply rightward. Still Democrats of course but politically adverse to the progressives.

I think it is actually possible a Republican who came across as reasonable could win California. Now whether California’s crazy Republicans could manage to find a reasonable Republican is another question, but never in my adult life have I even thought that possible before.

The Democratic dedication to elevating gender-based rights over sex-based rights is going to lose the party even in places like California. It is incomprehensible, and I can only conclude there are massive donations involved, because it’s a suicidal party policy otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will probably stand for Never Trump.

They cant move on from Trump or figure out he's popular

Trump is still whining about Biden virtually every day. And Trump is far from popular (and getting worse). His failures are stacking up. It's not even clear why he wants to be President any more beyond the grift.

Trump’s approval is going up not down.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-update-polls-2074502

https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52286-donald-trump-rising-popularity-approval-budget-2026-midterms-democrats-leader-policing-race-elon-musk-may-30-june-2-2025-economist-yougov-poll

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/06/04/trump-approval-rating-tracker-bounces-back-from-april-slump-in-latest-poll/

…while Democrats continue to sink.

more confirmation that the DCUM elites are not that smart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

What are you referring to here?

I'm referring to a campaign ad that Kamala released with a bunch of gay actors repeatedly saying "I'm a man" and "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris." It was an uncomfortable watch. I imagine it must have felt like how we as women would feel if they had Ellen DeGeneres dress up in a floral dress with high heels, talk about how she liked to feel pretty and that voting for Trump made her feel feminine.

Believe I found it:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jLzYPbtklGs

If so, this is really cringe

This ad illustrates what I think are the Democrats' three biggest problems:

1. None of the decision makers and insiders in charge of picking which policies to highlight and selling the party and its candidates to the American people has anything in common with most Americans.

2. Worse, these weirdo decision makers and insiders have completely marginalized anyone remotely normal. Thus, even the "normal people" lower down the food chain or on the periphery of their circles who should serve as a fresh pair of eyes on ideas are either ultra weird as well or feel they have to play weird to avoid being marginalized.

3. Worst of all, Democratic decision makers have zero self-awareness. They have no clue that they and everyone in their circles have nothing in common epistemologically, ontologically, and experientially with 99% of Americans.

I could grab 100 random people off the street and hardly any would need more than 15 seconds of that ad to say that only the Black actor is believable as a typical man. The other alleged men are clearly gay, trans, or effeminate. Selecting outliers to speak on behalf of the majority comes off as unwitting parody or yet another manipulative attempt to displace traditional masculinity with newfangled varieties Democrats find less offensive. Yet no one who had anything to do with this ad from conceptualization to airing understood that? If ever there was a smoking gun that Democrats are led by elitist fringe weirdos in a very delusional echo chamber....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will probably stand for Never Trump.

They cant move on from Trump or figure out he's popular

Trump is still whining about Biden virtually every day. And Trump is far from popular (and getting worse). His failures are stacking up. It's not even clear why he wants to be President any more beyond the grift.

Trump’s approval is going up not down.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-update-polls-2074502

https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52286-donald-trump-rising-popularity-approval-budget-2026-midterms-democrats-leader-policing-race-elon-musk-may-30-june-2-2025-economist-yougov-poll

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/06/04/trump-approval-rating-tracker-bounces-back-from-april-slump-in-latest-poll/

…while Democrats continue to sink.

Polls in 2025 are as meaningless as they were in 2017 or 2021. Remember when Biden was viewed more favorably than the GOP in 2021?

What evidence do you have that approval ratings are improving for the party that just lost Congress and the presidency?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will probably stand for Never Trump.

They cant move on from Trump or figure out he's popular

Trump is still whining about Biden virtually every day. And Trump is far from popular (and getting worse). His failures are stacking up. It's not even clear why he wants to be President any more beyond the grift.

Trump’s approval is going up not down.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-update-polls-2074502

https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52286-donald-trump-rising-popularity-approval-budget-2026-midterms-democrats-leader-policing-race-elon-musk-may-30-june-2-2025-economist-yougov-poll

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/06/04/trump-approval-rating-tracker-bounces-back-from-april-slump-in-latest-poll/

…while Democrats continue to sink.

Polls in 2025 are as meaningless as they were in 2017 or 2021. Remember when Biden was viewed more favorably than the GOP in 2021?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't seem like democrats are going to adjust their platform at all. They seem to be doubling down, if anything. They are spending millions to learn "how to talk to young men," learning their slang in a "hello fellow kids" way. That means they are going to be consistent with their issues but adjust their messaging a bit. Probably this time, they won't hire a bunch of gay actors to pretend to be straight white men and say hilarious things like "I'm man enough to vote for Kamala Harris."

Dem top issues will remain the same: trans, gay, race quotas, the patriarchy, white women as "the problem," Palestine, protesting as the peak expression of politics, and getting more women to have abortions.

Not a single one of those issues was a significant part of Harris’ platform except for reproductive freedom. Why to you insist on lying?

Be serious. Trans wasn’t part of her platform because it was unpopular and voters hate it. And yet Democrats persist in putting men in women’s sports, locker rooms, and prisons. I don’t what they campaign on, I pay attention to what they are actually doing. Let me know when Dems stop pushing men in women’s spaces and maybe I’ll consider voting for them again.

If the majority of people in California are okay with biological males competing in female sports, so be it. I don't live in California. If you live in California and don't like it, move or vote better. "Men in women's sports" isn't something Dems are pushing for nationally. It's a local thing. Get over it.

Californian here. I think it is possible this state will go red over issues like this, and I didn’t think that was possible for most of my life.

You need to also go red on border security, but that’ll never happen. Just look at all the illegal criminals you welcomed, and are STILL fighting FOR the CRIMINALS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will probably stand for Never Trump.

They cant move on from Trump or figure out he's popular

Trump is still whining about Biden virtually every day. And Trump is far from popular (and getting worse). His failures are stacking up. It's not even clear why he wants to be President any more beyond the grift.

Trump’s approval is going up not down.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-update-polls-2074502

https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52286-donald-trump-rising-popularity-approval-budget-2026-midterms-democrats-leader-policing-race-elon-musk-may-30-june-2-2025-economist-yougov-poll

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/06/04/trump-approval-rating-tracker-bounces-back-from-april-slump-in-latest-poll/

…while Democrats continue to sink.