Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) urged her Democratic colleagues to stop attacking the "oligarchy," arguing that the word did not resonate with most Americans.
Slotkin is the new Sinema and can GFY, but there is a component to this that does deserve some discussion.
If you look back on the past 10 years of the Democrats climbing hills for issues, I think it’s out of sync with the majority of people. The staunch fight for identity politics is not what people seem to want or need right now, and they need to understand that. Maybe there was a time when this was what their constituents wanted, but no longer.
Now they need to be really fucking strong on fighting the billionaires, pushing back against the front to vast majority of the country that has no wealth, and finding ways to make that flip around so that the wealthy who are imposing the enshitification of the lower and middle class are held accountable for doing so.
Forget the current struggles we’re forced to dread living through, and give people a clear plan and the hope that you’ll actually be attacking these things when elected. Seems pretty simple.
Who do you think are the voices who are really strong against billionaires? And who are the voices who are the strongest in support of this “identity politics” bogeyman? Because it’s pretty much the same people. This idea that the Democrats running interference for the rich are using wokeness to do it is just bullshit. The same people saying stop wokeness are the ones who also don’t want to talk about wealth inequality.
There’s no secret plot to distract with identity politics, just rich centrists chasing the golden age of Clintonism and white people thinking the only policies that should really matter are the ones that affect them.
Sanders and Cortez are literally doing a tour right now AGAINST the Oligarchy bullshit.
Crockett, Porter, Durbin, Duckworth, Warnock, Kaine, Gillinrand (shocker) have all pushed bills to raise the ceiling on taxable income for Social Security, and higher tiered taxes exponentially for wealthy earners.
And would you consider either of them to represent the anti-woke strain of the Democratic party?
Anti-oligarchy and “identity politics” are not two camps in the Democratic party. The same people who are against focus on the oligarchy are the ones who are against focusing on “identity politics”.
I did. Her target is all wrong. She’s focused on some culture bullshit, and ignoring the real issue which is a full out fucking class war. She literally is trying to divert people’s attention away from the billionaires who own her ass. Fuck that.
Except she’s saying a different word polls better, not that we need to focus less on them.
I don’t see how saying a different word is more effective is the same as drawing attention away from the topic, or how saying Dems need to do better about avoiding being seen as ineffectual is an issue.
She claimed the word oligarchy doesnt resonate and it absolutely does. You are just buying into Slotkins pro business, pro aipac, manipulative narrative.
I get that you prefer the word oligarchy. That’s fine. I’m not sure I feel strongly that we call them oligarchs or if we compare them to monarchs in our messaging how they’re bad.
I’m just not seeing how a disagreement on verbiage without a difference in content makes someone as awful as people seem to be reacting.
Its about who she is.
You keep trying to frame this narrowly and we all need to keep an eye on who people are with their actions, what their record is, and who is paying them.
Slotkin is a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and a member of the New Democrats Coalition. She’s also far right as zionist supporter as they come, and she’s already chair on a committee on terrorism and intelligence-- as a jr senator elected 2 months ago.
The new democrat coalition is what the blue dog dems became, and inherited the members of that group. They are extremely pro business and anti immigration, and deficit focused (aka, republicans)
Remember the blue dogs? Their brand became so toxic they had to rebrand as new democrats. But its the same well funded group that is always for tax cuts for the rich, but shuts down anything for the people based on a vague deficit/fiscal austerity argument. They consistently block any advancements on health care, citing cost even though the CBO says it would save money and propel the economy-- but limit the complete market control of health insurance companies. (new democrats work for them, never us)
I’d urge you to actually read up on the new demcrts coalition and the problem solvers caucus and tell me how either one are good for the democratic party. Those are the only two caucuses Slotkin identifies with.
I’m not trying to frame it narrowly. The headline is misleading click bait. Everything you say could be 100% true and it wouldn’t change that she didn’t say what you’re saying she said.
I really don’t care if you want to make it about segments of the democratic party. You’re going to be hard pressed to convince me that suggesting a different word for criticism inverts the criticism, even if they are already on an intelligence and terrorism committee (which I have no idea how that relevant to anything).
Argue she’s awful if you want, I honestly don’t care, but that doesn’t make her statements in this case pro business, pro oligarchy, or anything particularly interesting.
And yes, I’ve looked at her voting records and donors. I don’t like everything I see, but it’s mostly fine, and definitively better than the other candidates.
Slotkin is the new Sinema and can GFY, but there is a component to this that does deserve some discussion.
If you look back on the past 10 years of the Democrats climbing hills for issues, I think it’s out of sync with the majority of people. The staunch fight for identity politics is not what people seem to want or need right now, and they need to understand that. Maybe there was a time when this was what their constituents wanted, but no longer.
Now they need to be really fucking strong on fighting the billionaires, pushing back against the front to vast majority of the country that has no wealth, and finding ways to make that flip around so that the wealthy who are imposing the enshitification of the lower and middle class are held accountable for doing so.
Forget the current struggles we’re forced to dread living through, and give people a clear plan and the hope that you’ll actually be attacking these things when elected. Seems pretty simple.
sinema was poison from the very moment she was elected.
They’re paid a lot of money specifically so they don’t understand that…
The entire reason for the culture war is to distract people from the fact that the wealthiest are fighting a class war.
You think she can’t understand because she’s not able to. It’s a willful ignorance, and require lots of money for that cognitive dissonance
Who do you think are the voices who are really strong against billionaires? And who are the voices who are the strongest in support of this “identity politics” bogeyman? Because it’s pretty much the same people. This idea that the Democrats running interference for the rich are using wokeness to do it is just bullshit. The same people saying stop wokeness are the ones who also don’t want to talk about wealth inequality.
There’s no secret plot to distract with identity politics, just rich centrists chasing the golden age of Clintonism and white people thinking the only policies that should really matter are the ones that affect them.
more like, people like her is chasing the same money the gop are chasing, which megadonor moneys.
Sanders and Cortez are literally doing a tour right now AGAINST the Oligarchy bullshit.
Crockett, Porter, Durbin, Duckworth, Warnock, Kaine, Gillinrand (shocker) have all pushed bills to raise the ceiling on taxable income for Social Security, and higher tiered taxes exponentially for wealthy earners.
What in the hell are you talking about?
And would you consider either of them to represent the anti-woke strain of the Democratic party?
Anti-oligarchy and “identity politics” are not two camps in the Democratic party. The same people who are against focus on the oligarchy are the ones who are against focusing on “identity politics”.
class war vs culture war. she doesnt want that.
There is no “anti-woke”, because the only dipshits who believe there is “woke” in the first place are Fox News enthusiasts.
Stop buying into all this drama, my God.
and people pretending to be on the “left” but often use woke.
You’re the one who just made an argument to listen to the centrists and stop doing “identity politics”. You’re the drama!
Never said anything like that, but it’s obvious where your mind with it 🤣
Did you actually read what she said? It’s a lot closer in message to what you just said than I think you might have expected.
I did. Her target is all wrong. She’s focused on some culture bullshit, and ignoring the real issue which is a full out fucking class war. She literally is trying to divert people’s attention away from the billionaires who own her ass. Fuck that.
Except she’s saying a different word polls better, not that we need to focus less on them.
I don’t see how saying a different word is more effective is the same as drawing attention away from the topic, or how saying Dems need to do better about avoiding being seen as ineffectual is an issue.
She claimed the word oligarchy doesnt resonate and it absolutely does. You are just buying into Slotkins pro business, pro aipac, manipulative narrative.
You’re being duped, ricecake. Snap out of it.
I’m really not.
I get that you prefer the word oligarchy. That’s fine. I’m not sure I feel strongly that we call them oligarchs or if we compare them to monarchs in our messaging how they’re bad.
I’m just not seeing how a disagreement on verbiage without a difference in content makes someone as awful as people seem to be reacting.
Its about who she is.
You keep trying to frame this narrowly and we all need to keep an eye on who people are with their actions, what their record is, and who is paying them.
Slotkin is a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, and a member of the New Democrats Coalition. She’s also far right as zionist supporter as they come, and she’s already chair on a committee on terrorism and intelligence-- as a jr senator elected 2 months ago.
The new democrat coalition is what the blue dog dems became, and inherited the members of that group. They are extremely pro business and anti immigration, and deficit focused (aka, republicans)
Remember the blue dogs? Their brand became so toxic they had to rebrand as new democrats. But its the same well funded group that is always for tax cuts for the rich, but shuts down anything for the people based on a vague deficit/fiscal austerity argument. They consistently block any advancements on health care, citing cost even though the CBO says it would save money and propel the economy-- but limit the complete market control of health insurance companies. (new democrats work for them, never us)
https://theweek.com/articles/713180/why-blue-dogs-destroy-democratic-party-again
https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/blue-dog-democrats-arent-making-sense-on-health-care-reform/
I’d urge you to actually read up on the new demcrts coalition and the problem solvers caucus and tell me how either one are good for the democratic party. Those are the only two caucuses Slotkin identifies with.
I’m not trying to frame it narrowly. The headline is misleading click bait. Everything you say could be 100% true and it wouldn’t change that she didn’t say what you’re saying she said.
I really don’t care if you want to make it about segments of the democratic party. You’re going to be hard pressed to convince me that suggesting a different word for criticism inverts the criticism, even if they are already on an intelligence and terrorism committee (which I have no idea how that relevant to anything).
Argue she’s awful if you want, I honestly don’t care, but that doesn’t make her statements in this case pro business, pro oligarchy, or anything particularly interesting.
And yes, I’ve looked at her voting records and donors. I don’t like everything I see, but it’s mostly fine, and definitively better than the other candidates.