MonkRome

If I understand their outlook, first job is getting people who consistently vote for Dems to be reminded and motivated to go to the polls. 2nd is convincing consistent voters to vote for you (that includes Republicans and third party), a distant last is convincing non-voters or occasional voters. I think the problem with trying to get 3rd party voters to vote for Dems is that the type of person that votes 3rd party is very difficult to convince that you're an ally.

They could completely realign the party platform to fit with 3rd party and non voters biggest issues and most won't shift their vote for many reasons. Disgust for the 2 party system, distrust that the party will follow a more left wing agenda, conspiracy theories, the needs to be contrarian or protect their sense of moral purity, etc.

While I'm not sure I agree with the parties approach to disaffected voters. I do think the amount of investment needed to get those voters is possibly outweighed by the amount of voters you may lose in the process. And that sense of inherent risk is stopping the party from taking a chance. Maybe we get lucky and they no longer see an alternative, but I doubt it.

I think you're wrong about how the party sees non voters. When you don't vote, the party treats you like a non voter and moves their platform to the right to appeal to the voters. When you sit home in an election the party doesn't go "how do we get these votes of people that only vote when the stars align perfectly", they go, "how do we get these votes of people that always vote". Every far left person mad about the country moving right can blame themselves just as much as the party. People who consistently participate shape the future.

Source: I've worked for the Democratic party and have a pretty good idea how they interpret voter turnout data.

Naw, they were using that before all the anti trans nonsense. It's more about their inability to see women as human. They identify them more for their gender than being the same species as them. If they started calling them women that would humanize women too much...

I'll believe it when I see it, there is too much money to be made by selling division and overblown narratives.

Democratic party aside, Bernie couldn't get the votes. I actually think the news media has been a much much bigger problem with someone like Bernie getting power. They always try to paint someone like him as being radical, when anywhere else in the world he would be a normal person on the left.

If you don't know what you are doing, and still young, just set a low cost broad market index fund or ETF as the place your retirement funds go. An example would be VTSAX or VTI. Disclaimer: I am not an investment expert or advisor.

One poll means very little in a larger context. You have to look at the average of all Iowa polls and draw trends. Writing articles about single polls is just mindless sensationalism.

I thought they die because they can no longer support their weight either because they can't digest enough or hunt enough food to sustain their size?

It's these bad faith arguments that caused the thread to turn against you. Gender isn't a cat, and it certainly isn't anything at all. You claim you wanted earnest conversation, but you undermined that with snide comments you knew would result in negative reaction.

Ask yourself if he would have said that comment to a white Christian. If not, then you have your answer.

Would he have mentioned a beeper if the recipient was a white Christian? It hasn't lost any of it's meaning it's just that some people are incapable or unwilling to recognize it unless it's backed by a nazi symbol, white hoods, or overt calls for racial violence. Your inability to recognize reality does not mean reality ceases to exist.

Exactly, few people are laughing at people in any other tesla. It's specifically this vehicle because it's a impractical hunk of junk AND ugly as fuck.