I was just averaging numbers from the 4 big (yes illegal) betting sites, but I wouldn’t give those much weight at this point, even in a less compromised political climate, just suggesting that perception may be explained in part by these new blood Dems.
Agreed that the senate race is a clincher according to rules of play that the regime intends to ignore regardless.
Re: DNC, party leadership has power/influence over candidates and their platforms only to the extent that they can aid a candidate’s election or reelection. So when leadership demonstrates a lack of interest in winning, or even a vested interest in losing, they forfeit that influence. That’s why I say at this point Jeffries’ fate is bound to the regime’s and I’m not particularly interested in or worried about what he might do or say from here forward.
I have no opinions on the white populist front. I could speculate as to why but it doesn’t strike me as relevant or important.
The lack of white populists in a party of a country were 65% of the population is white, shows they, somebodies, are killing populists in the cradle, killing the ones that could challenge the current leadership. The minority ones can’t so they don’t crush them, character assassinate them before they can get close to office. Is what I figure and I could say a lot about this and I do.
As to the betting markets, when they illegalized predict it they gave the thumbs up to the for profit ones for the same thing. I didn’t hear much of it since, 2021 I think.
I totally agree on Jeffries and the rest of the establishment and leaders and the rest.
I’m not sure a lack of white candidates would necessarily suggest that they’re under-represented in populist movements. Anecdotal, but the volunteers I worked with in the Mamdani campaign were closer to that percentage representation in most work groups, canvassing teams, and crowds; i.e., plenty of white people who were not only voting for a populist candidate but contributing their time and skills to the campaign.
The simplest explanation as to why POC dominate this year’s roster might be that they represent communities who are more acutely affected by these matters of policy, so they can speak a bit more directly to the challenges addressed by their campaigns. Or something along those lines. Is it possible there’s some dark trend suggested by the demographics of the candidates not matching the national distribution? Sure. But I think I’d need more or better evidence before entertaining that hypothesis.
I was just averaging numbers from the 4 big (yes illegal) betting sites, but I wouldn’t give those much weight at this point, even in a less compromised political climate, just suggesting that perception may be explained in part by these new blood Dems.
Agreed that the senate race is a clincher according to rules of play that the regime intends to ignore regardless.
Re: DNC, party leadership has power/influence over candidates and their platforms only to the extent that they can aid a candidate’s election or reelection. So when leadership demonstrates a lack of interest in winning, or even a vested interest in losing, they forfeit that influence. That’s why I say at this point Jeffries’ fate is bound to the regime’s and I’m not particularly interested in or worried about what he might do or say from here forward.
I have no opinions on the white populist front. I could speculate as to why but it doesn’t strike me as relevant or important.
The lack of white populists in a party of a country were 65% of the population is white, shows they, somebodies, are killing populists in the cradle, killing the ones that could challenge the current leadership. The minority ones can’t so they don’t crush them, character assassinate them before they can get close to office. Is what I figure and I could say a lot about this and I do.
As to the betting markets, when they illegalized predict it they gave the thumbs up to the for profit ones for the same thing. I didn’t hear much of it since, 2021 I think.
I totally agree on Jeffries and the rest of the establishment and leaders and the rest.
I’m not sure a lack of white candidates would necessarily suggest that they’re under-represented in populist movements. Anecdotal, but the volunteers I worked with in the Mamdani campaign were closer to that percentage representation in most work groups, canvassing teams, and crowds; i.e., plenty of white people who were not only voting for a populist candidate but contributing their time and skills to the campaign.
The simplest explanation as to why POC dominate this year’s roster might be that they represent communities who are more acutely affected by these matters of policy, so they can speak a bit more directly to the challenges addressed by their campaigns. Or something along those lines. Is it possible there’s some dark trend suggested by the demographics of the candidates not matching the national distribution? Sure. But I think I’d need more or better evidence before entertaining that hypothesis.