Paulyglot
@paulyglot.bsky.social
Reposted by Paulyglot
Yes, but also, an acknowledgement that government income could actually be increased substantially through returning to a tax structure at least a tiny bit closer to the post-war era would be nice, too.
If the Democrats can't bring themselves to say "government spending is good, actually" in this precise moment, then they really are cooked and all need to be replaced.
Welker to Slotkin: "Democrats were in charge for four years. You were in Congress at the time. Why didn't Democrats do more to cut government spending when they were in charge?"
March 9, 2025 at 3:52 PM
Yes, but also, an acknowledgement that government income could actually be increased substantially through returning to a tax structure at least a tiny bit closer to the post-war era would be nice, too.
Reposted by Paulyglot
I've seen a few "actually, a lot of dems are really good at the internet, they just aren't getting attention" please give me non-AOC, non-Bernie examples so that I can educate myself.
I will say though, being good at the internet MEANS GETTING ATTENTION.
I will say though, being good at the internet MEANS GETTING ATTENTION.
I NEED GOOD, THOUGHTFUL LEADERS TO GET WAY BETTER AT USING THE INTERNET LIKE FIVE YEARS AGO
March 9, 2025 at 7:00 PM
I've seen a few "actually, a lot of dems are really good at the internet, they just aren't getting attention" please give me non-AOC, non-Bernie examples so that I can educate myself.
I will say though, being good at the internet MEANS GETTING ATTENTION.
I will say though, being good at the internet MEANS GETTING ATTENTION.
Reposted by Paulyglot
And where reputable journalists and thinkers go, so do elected officials.
I’ve been getting asked lately about a more serious + systemic migration to Bluesky among electeds.
Idk the answer but it highlights how much of a breaking point misinfo & throttling has become for Twitter(& other platforms)
I’ve been getting asked lately about a more serious + systemic migration to Bluesky among electeds.
Idk the answer but it highlights how much of a breaking point misinfo & throttling has become for Twitter(& other platforms)
Bluesky is winning because both twitter and threads have gone out of their way to make their platforms inhospitable to reputable journalists and news. @kattenbarge.bsky.social reports:
www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-...
www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-...
Journalists flock to Bluesky as X becomes increasingly 'toxic'
Journalists are finding more readers and less hate on Bluesky than on the platform they used to know as Twitter.
www.nbcnews.com
December 1, 2024 at 12:01 AM
And where reputable journalists and thinkers go, so do elected officials.
I’ve been getting asked lately about a more serious + systemic migration to Bluesky among electeds.
Idk the answer but it highlights how much of a breaking point misinfo & throttling has become for Twitter(& other platforms)
I’ve been getting asked lately about a more serious + systemic migration to Bluesky among electeds.
Idk the answer but it highlights how much of a breaking point misinfo & throttling has become for Twitter(& other platforms)
Reposted by Paulyglot
In 2018 Dems elected the largest class to Congress since Watergate, ~60 seats.
A lot of it was, yes, Trump backlash. But the winners also had another thing in common, despite a wide range of differences: most rejected corporate PAC money.
It’s a hugely compelling factor to voters & underdiscussed
A lot of it was, yes, Trump backlash. But the winners also had another thing in common, despite a wide range of differences: most rejected corporate PAC money.
It’s a hugely compelling factor to voters & underdiscussed
I think the Dems need to field gruff corruption busters at all levels whose primary campaign response to culture war issues is “All Americans should enjoy the freedom and bounty of this great country. That won’t be possible so long as venal men impoverish you and loot the country of your wealth”
November 27, 2024 at 1:22 PM
In 2018 Dems elected the largest class to Congress since Watergate, ~60 seats.
A lot of it was, yes, Trump backlash. But the winners also had another thing in common, despite a wide range of differences: most rejected corporate PAC money.
It’s a hugely compelling factor to voters & underdiscussed
A lot of it was, yes, Trump backlash. But the winners also had another thing in common, despite a wide range of differences: most rejected corporate PAC money.
It’s a hugely compelling factor to voters & underdiscussed