American Politics: The Last Month

[Danternoust]

But now Zelensky’s press appearances may be dogged by questions about Routh, however absurdly distant from Kyiv’s agenda his apparent attack on a Florida golf course was. It will feed into the ultimate paranoia of US isolationists: that actions overseas which appear to benefit America’s global interests carry with them the risk of fomenting violence back home.

Wonderful. CNN thinks I'm working for the Kremlin now. It is no longer allowed to be skeptical of foreign adventures.

[Ifreann]

But now Zelensky’s press appearances may be dogged by questions about Routh, however absurdly distant from Kyiv’s agenda his apparent attack on a Florida golf course was. It will feed into the ultimate paranoia of US isolationists: that actions overseas which appear to benefit America’s global interests carry with them the risk of fomenting violence back home.

Wonderful. CNN thinks I'm working for the Kremlin now. It is no longer allowed to be skeptical of foreign adventures.

I doubt anyone at CNN thinks anything about you.

[Infected Mushroom]

No there isn't. he is a danger to democracy and the world and my rights as a gay man.

President Trump is not a danger to Freedom and Democracy in the USA, you read the leftist media and the Leftist Fake News Media. According to the so called logic, President Trump could have declared himself dictator of the USA in 2016 and be dictator of the USA right now. This is how ridiculous those charges by certain leftist democrats are to believe. As I explained in greater detail many times. He cant do so even if he wanted too, this is how ridiculous this is to believe. GMS and I Speak for Me and all of US Proud Republican, Nationalist, Patriot President Trump of the USA, Supporters, Pro USA, American, Nationalist, Patriot Citizens of the USA, with Pride and Honor, as we call each other.

Trump will make America Great Again.

[Neu California]

Gen Z women are the future Republicans were so worried about

Paywall bypass that may or may not work

Tucked into a fascinating article about partisanship and names in America, The Washington Post’s Andrew Van Dam and Lenny Bronner included a chart that captures a remarkable divide: the split in party identity by gender among younger Americans.

The chart, using voter registration data from the firm L2, looked like the one below. At left is the distribution of party identification among women by age (young to older as you move left to right). At right, the same data for men. (The percentages reflect the portion of the total electorate represented by that age and gender.)

Americans under 30 are more likely to be registered independents or third party than to be Democrats or Republicans — but that’s because of young men. Young women are about as likely to be registered as Democrats as to be independents. Neither group is terribly likely to be registered as Republican.

One reason for this was captured in a new analysis published last week by Gallup: Young people are more likely to agree with liberal positions than they used to be, but young women have shifted the most to the left.

To measure this, Gallup compared views on an array of issue questions from polling conducted from 2008 to 2016 — let’s call this the Barack Obama era — with the same questions asked from 2017 to 2024, which we’ll call the Donald Trump era. Among respondents ages 30 and up in both eras, the shifts to the left were about the same. Women were slightly more likely to hold stronger liberal positions than men, illustrated on the graph below by the individual issues (identified with letters) appearing above the diagonal line.

On some issues, like “think use of marijuana should be legal,” both men and women became more liberal to the same extent, so the (J) representing that question appears right on the line. On other issues, like (K) (“the federal government is responsible for ensuring healthcare coverage”), women shifted to the left by a larger amount, so it appears well above the diagonal line. On only one issue did both men and women move away from the liberal position: (W), the U.S. is spending too much on defense.

Now compare that with the difference between men and women under 30. In. nearly every case, the issues appear well above the diagonal line — meaning that young women shifted much more to the left than did young men.

There are exceptions, you’ll notice. But the correlation in the shift between older women and older men is far stronger than the correlation between younger women and younger men.

In fact, younger women also shifted to the left relative to older women. The correlation between older women and younger men is stronger than the correlation between older women and younger women.

Comparing women ages 18 to 29 in the 2008 to 2016 era means we’re comparing a different set of women in that age range more recently. A 21-year-old woman in 2008 was 30 in 2017. So this is not necessarily a shift in personal views, but instead in generational ones.

In her analysis of the Gallup data, the New York Times’s Claire Cain Miller points to the likely role Trump played in this shift, including his attacks on Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. A number of other factors probably contributed, like the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter. The biggest movement among younger women, though, was on environmental issues.

What’s striking is that shift was so disproportionately among women, as other data have also shown. Men, young and old, moved to the left on the measures Gallup considered, but in correlation with one another. Women didn’t.

Barack Obama’s 2008 election was seen as the advent of a new, more liberal and more diverse American electorate. Trump’s 2016 election was heavily a reaction to that shift, a response to the ways in which America was changing.

Young American women, the Gallup data suggests, manifested the change about which Republicans were so concerned.

[Port Carverton]

Gen Z women are the future Republicans were so worried about

Paywall bypass that may or may not work

Tucked into a fascinating article about partisanship and names in America, The Washington Post’s Andrew Van Dam and Lenny Bronner included a chart that captures a remarkable divide: the split in party identity by gender among younger Americans.

The chart, using voter registration data from the firm L2, looked like the one below. At left is the distribution of party identification among women by age (young to older as you move left to right). At right, the same data for men. (The percentages reflect the portion of the total electorate represented by that age and gender.)

Americans under 30 are more likely to be registered independents or third party than to be Democrats or Republicans — but that’s because of young men. Young women are about as likely to be registered as Democrats as to be independents. Neither group is terribly likely to be registered as Republican.

One reason for this was captured in a new analysis published last week by Gallup: Young people are more likely to agree with liberal positions than they used to be, but young women have shifted the most to the left.

To measure this, Gallup compared views on an array of issue questions from polling conducted from 2008 to 2016 — let’s call this the Barack Obama era — with the same questions asked from 2017 to 2024, which we’ll call the Donald Trump era. Among respondents ages 30 and up in both eras, the shifts to the left were about the same. Women were slightly more likely to hold stronger liberal positions than men, illustrated on the graph below by the individual issues (identified with letters) appearing above the diagonal line.

On some issues, like “think use of marijuana should be legal,” both men and women became more liberal to the same extent, so the (J) representing that question appears right on the line. On other issues, like (K) (“the federal government is responsible for ensuring healthcare coverage”), women shifted to the left by a larger amount, so it appears well above the diagonal line. On only one issue did both men and women move away from the liberal position: (W), the U.S. is spending too much on defense.

Now compare that with the difference between men and women under 30. In. nearly every case, the issues appear well above the diagonal line — meaning that young women shifted much more to the left than did young men.

There are exceptions, you’ll notice. But the correlation in the shift between older women and older men is far stronger than the correlation between younger women and younger men.

In fact, younger women also shifted to the left relative to older women. The correlation between older women and younger men is stronger than the correlation between older women and younger women.

Comparing women ages 18 to 29 in the 2008 to 2016 era means we’re comparing a different set of women in that age range more recently. A 21-year-old woman in 2008 was 30 in 2017. So this is not necessarily a shift in personal views, but instead in generational ones.

In her analysis of the Gallup data, the New York Times’s Claire Cain Miller points to the likely role Trump played in this shift, including his attacks on Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. A number of other factors probably contributed, like the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter. The biggest movement among younger women, though, was on environmental issues.

What’s striking is that shift was so disproportionately among women, as other data have also shown. Men, young and old, moved to the left on the measures Gallup considered, but in correlation with one another. Women didn’t.

Barack Obama’s 2008 election was seen as the advent of a new, more liberal and more diverse American electorate. Trump’s 2016 election was heavily a reaction to that shift, a response to the ways in which America was changing.

Young American women, the Gallup data suggests, manifested the change about which Republicans were so concerned.

Why do you post this as if it's le epic pwn against the Republican Party? The election is still pretty close all things considered.

[Neu California]

Gen Z women are the future Republicans were so worried about

Paywall bypass that may or may not work

Tucked into a fascinating article about partisanship and names in America, The Washington Post’s Andrew Van Dam and Lenny Bronner included a chart that captures a remarkable divide: the split in party identity by gender among younger Americans.

The chart, using voter registration data from the firm L2, looked like the one below. At left is the distribution of party identification among women by age (young to older as you move left to right). At right, the same data for men. (The percentages reflect the portion of the total electorate represented by that age and gender.)

Americans under 30 are more likely to be registered independents or third party than to be Democrats or Republicans — but that’s because of young men. Young women are about as likely to be registered as Democrats as to be independents. Neither group is terribly likely to be registered as Republican.

One reason for this was captured in a new analysis published last week by Gallup: Young people are more likely to agree with liberal positions than they used to be, but young women have shifted the most to the left.

To measure this, Gallup compared views on an array of issue questions from polling conducted from 2008 to 2016 — let’s call this the Barack Obama era — with the same questions asked from 2017 to 2024, which we’ll call the Donald Trump era. Among respondents ages 30 and up in both eras, the shifts to the left were about the same. Women were slightly more likely to hold stronger liberal positions than men, illustrated on the graph below by the individual issues (identified with letters) appearing above the diagonal line.

On some issues, like “think use of marijuana should be legal,” both men and women became more liberal to the same extent, so the (J) representing that question appears right on the line. On other issues, like (K) (“the federal government is responsible for ensuring healthcare coverage”), women shifted to the left by a larger amount, so it appears well above the diagonal line. On only one issue did both men and women move away from the liberal position: (W), the U.S. is spending too much on defense.

Now compare that with the difference between men and women under 30. In. nearly every case, the issues appear well above the diagonal line — meaning that young women shifted much more to the left than did young men.

There are exceptions, you’ll notice. But the correlation in the shift between older women and older men is far stronger than the correlation between younger women and younger men.

In fact, younger women also shifted to the left relative to older women. The correlation between older women and younger men is stronger than the correlation between older women and younger women.

Comparing women ages 18 to 29 in the 2008 to 2016 era means we’re comparing a different set of women in that age range more recently. A 21-year-old woman in 2008 was 30 in 2017. So this is not necessarily a shift in personal views, but instead in generational ones.

In her analysis of the Gallup data, the New York Times’s Claire Cain Miller points to the likely role Trump played in this shift, including his attacks on Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. A number of other factors probably contributed, like the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter. The biggest movement among younger women, though, was on environmental issues.

What’s striking is that shift was so disproportionately among women, as other data have also shown. Men, young and old, moved to the left on the measures Gallup considered, but in correlation with one another. Women didn’t.

Barack Obama’s 2008 election was seen as the advent of a new, more liberal and more diverse American electorate. Trump’s 2016 election was heavily a reaction to that shift, a response to the ways in which America was changing.

Young American women, the Gallup data suggests, manifested the change about which Republicans were so concerned.

Why do you post this as if it's le epic pwn against the Republican Party? The election is still pretty close all things considered.

Why do you think I'm posting it like that? I'm just posting an interesting article I found (and the title of the article was theirs)

[Khadgar]

Gen Z women are the future Republicans were so worried about

Paywall bypass that may or may not work

Tucked into a fascinating article about partisanship and names in America, The Washington Post’s Andrew Van Dam and Lenny Bronner included a chart that captures a remarkable divide: the split in party identity by gender among younger Americans.

The chart, using voter registration data from the firm L2, looked like the one below. At left is the distribution of party identification among women by age (young to older as you move left to right). At right, the same data for men. (The percentages reflect the portion of the total electorate represented by that age and gender.)

Americans under 30 are more likely to be registered independents or third party than to be Democrats or Republicans — but that’s because of young men. Young women are about as likely to be registered as Democrats as to be independents. Neither group is terribly likely to be registered as Republican.

One reason for this was captured in a new analysis published last week by Gallup: Young people are more likely to agree with liberal positions than they used to be, but young women have shifted the most to the left.

To measure this, Gallup compared views on an array of issue questions from polling conducted from 2008 to 2016 — let’s call this the Barack Obama era — with the same questions asked from 2017 to 2024, which we’ll call the Donald Trump era. Among respondents ages 30 and up in both eras, the shifts to the left were about the same. Women were slightly more likely to hold stronger liberal positions than men, illustrated on the graph below by the individual issues (identified with letters) appearing above the diagonal line.

On some issues, like “think use of marijuana should be legal,” both men and women became more liberal to the same extent, so the (J) representing that question appears right on the line. On other issues, like (K) (“the federal government is responsible for ensuring healthcare coverage”), women shifted to the left by a larger amount, so it appears well above the diagonal line. On only one issue did both men and women move away from the liberal position: (W), the U.S. is spending too much on defense.

Now compare that with the difference between men and women under 30. In. nearly every case, the issues appear well above the diagonal line — meaning that young women shifted much more to the left than did young men.

There are exceptions, you’ll notice. But the correlation in the shift between older women and older men is far stronger than the correlation between younger women and younger men.

In fact, younger women also shifted to the left relative to older women. The correlation between older women and younger men is stronger than the correlation between older women and younger women.

Comparing women ages 18 to 29 in the 2008 to 2016 era means we’re comparing a different set of women in that age range more recently. A 21-year-old woman in 2008 was 30 in 2017. So this is not necessarily a shift in personal views, but instead in generational ones.

In her analysis of the Gallup data, the New York Times’s Claire Cain Miller points to the likely role Trump played in this shift, including his attacks on Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. A number of other factors probably contributed, like the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter. The biggest movement among younger women, though, was on environmental issues.

What’s striking is that shift was so disproportionately among women, as other data have also shown. Men, young and old, moved to the left on the measures Gallup considered, but in correlation with one another. Women didn’t.

Barack Obama’s 2008 election was seen as the advent of a new, more liberal and more diverse American electorate. Trump’s 2016 election was heavily a reaction to that shift, a response to the ways in which America was changing.

Young American women, the Gallup data suggests, manifested the change about which Republicans were so concerned.

I hate having to rely on young people voting. Historically not the best gamble.

[Kaumudeen]

Gen Z women are the future Republicans were so worried about

Paywall bypass that may or may not work

Tucked into a fascinating article about partisanship and names in America, The Washington Post’s Andrew Van Dam and Lenny Bronner included a chart that captures a remarkable divide: the split in party identity by gender among younger Americans.

The chart, using voter registration data from the firm L2, looked like the one below. At left is the distribution of party identification among women by age (young to older as you move left to right). At right, the same data for men. (The percentages reflect the portion of the total electorate represented by that age and gender.)

Americans under 30 are more likely to be registered independents or third party than to be Democrats or Republicans — but that’s because of young men. Young women are about as likely to be registered as Democrats as to be independents. Neither group is terribly likely to be registered as Republican.

One reason for this was captured in a new analysis published last week by Gallup: Young people are more likely to agree with liberal positions than they used to be, but young women have shifted the most to the left.

To measure this, Gallup compared views on an array of issue questions from polling conducted from 2008 to 2016 — let’s call this the Barack Obama era — with the same questions asked from 2017 to 2024, which we’ll call the Donald Trump era. Among respondents ages 30 and up in both eras, the shifts to the left were about the same. Women were slightly more likely to hold stronger liberal positions than men, illustrated on the graph below by the individual issues (identified with letters) appearing above the diagonal line.

On some issues, like “think use of marijuana should be legal,” both men and women became more liberal to the same extent, so the (J) representing that question appears right on the line. On other issues, like (K) (“the federal government is responsible for ensuring healthcare coverage”), women shifted to the left by a larger amount, so it appears well above the diagonal line. On only one issue did both men and women move away from the liberal position: (W), the U.S. is spending too much on defense.

Now compare that with the difference between men and women under 30. In. nearly every case, the issues appear well above the diagonal line — meaning that young women shifted much more to the left than did young men.

There are exceptions, you’ll notice. But the correlation in the shift between older women and older men is far stronger than the correlation between younger women and younger men.

In fact, younger women also shifted to the left relative to older women. The correlation between older women and younger men is stronger than the correlation between older women and younger women.

Comparing women ages 18 to 29 in the 2008 to 2016 era means we’re comparing a different set of women in that age range more recently. A 21-year-old woman in 2008 was 30 in 2017. So this is not necessarily a shift in personal views, but instead in generational ones.

In her analysis of the Gallup data, the New York Times’s Claire Cain Miller points to the likely role Trump played in this shift, including his attacks on Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. A number of other factors probably contributed, like the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter. The biggest movement among younger women, though, was on environmental issues.

What’s striking is that shift was so disproportionately among women, as other data have also shown. Men, young and old, moved to the left on the measures Gallup considered, but in correlation with one another. Women didn’t.

Barack Obama’s 2008 election was seen as the advent of a new, more liberal and more diverse American electorate. Trump’s 2016 election was heavily a reaction to that shift, a response to the ways in which America was changing.

Young American women, the Gallup data suggests, manifested the change about which Republicans were so concerned.

I hate having to rely on young people voting. Historically not the best gamble.

Gen-Z women voting for Harris isn't gonna save America. They are blind to the fact that she's basically another Hillary.

[Khadgar]

I hate having to rely on young people voting. Historically not the best gamble.

Gen-Z women voting for Harris isn't gonna save America. They are blind to the fact that she's basically another Hillary.

A qualified woman? I quite agree.

[Kaumudeen]

Gen-Z women voting for Harris isn't gonna save America. They are blind to the fact that she's basically another Hillary.

A qualified woman? I quite agree.

Clinton and Harris are both pieces of shit.

[Futurist State of Flassau]

A qualified woman? I quite agree.

Clinton and Harris are both pieces of shit.

How?

[Khadgar]

Clinton and Harris are both pieces of shit.

How?

Well you see Hillary hurt their feelings by not being the demure mousy housewife they wanted. Kamala, well probably the same honestly.

[Kaumudeen]

How?

Well you see Hillary hurt their feelings by not being the demure mousy housewife they wanted. Kamala, well probably the same honestly.

Did you know that women can also be bad too?

[Futurist State of Flassau]

Well you see Hillary hurt their feelings by not being the demure mousy housewife they wanted. Kamala, well probably the same honestly.

Did you know that women can also be bad too?

Yes i khow, but how? Point out the reasons first and please not "Women can be bad so Women is bad"

[Khadgar]

Well you see Hillary hurt their feelings by not being the demure mousy housewife they wanted. Kamala, well probably the same honestly.

Did you know that women can also be bad too?

True, I mean look at Candace Owens or Laura Loomer.

[San Lumen]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-e ... rcna171357

DNC launches texting hotline to help potential supporters navigate the voting process

[Paddy O Fernature]

A qualified woman? I quite agree.

Clinton and Harris are both pieces of shit.

For once, I agree.

[Page]

How?

Well you see Hillary hurt their feelings by not being the demure mousy housewife they wanted. Kamala, well probably the same honestly.

Hillary Clinton is a fucking reptile, dude. I wouldn't go so far as to allege sexism didn't play a part in her defeat, but you can't deny that she's a fundamentally unlikeable person. Kamala does a decent bit better.

[Mercov]

Republicans when they have to shoot trump because they are bored:

[Khadgar]

Well you see Hillary hurt their feelings by not being the demure mousy housewife they wanted. Kamala, well probably the same honestly.

Hillary Clinton is a fucking reptile, dude. I wouldn't go so far as to allege sexism didn't play a part in her defeat, but you can't deny that she's a fundamentally unlikeable person. Kamala does a decent bit better.

I remember when America decided to vote for the guy they'd have a beer with rather than the guy who was competent and how that went. You'll forgive me I'm sure if I don't really count likeability as a reason to vote for someone.

Now election's getting close folks. Make sure your registration is accurate and active. Lots of less than ethical folks running elections purging voter rolls.

[Tarsonis]

Good thing is debatable. Trump is already using it to stoke hate. Won’t be long before Vance starts saying the same(if he hasn’t already). Makes you wonder the martyrdom if he was assassinated. The violence that would follow?

Still as I have said. I don’t want to seem him assassinated. If it happens; I won’t shed a tear.

I mean, alongside my general lack of desire for people to be killed, my main concern with someone killing Trump is that as a martyr is so much scarier if someone competent is able to get a hold of his legacy. His death should be ordinary and boring and the result of time and his own weird health choices.

He's gonna go the same way Elvis did

[Khadgar]

I mean, alongside my general lack of desire for people to be killed, my main concern with someone killing Trump is that as a martyr is so much scarier if someone competent is able to get a hold of his legacy. His death should be ordinary and boring and the result of time and his own weird health choices.

He's gonna go the same way Elvis did

Do amphetamines also cause bowel obstruction? A massive heart attack is what I figure likely but he could just slowly fade away as the dementia progresses.

[Zurkerx]

Pennsylvania's Supreme Court has rejected Cornel West's bid to get on the ballot, saying West’s campaign lacked the required affidavits for 14 of West’s 19 presidential electors. Mail-in ballots are now being printed and will be sent out. The removal of West will undoubtedly help Harris, who is in a tight race with Trump. RFK Jr.'s name was dropped from the ballot after he withdrew from the race. And in Georgia, in another reversal, votes for West and Claudia De la Cruz will count on the ballot after the State's Supreme Court paused their disqualification.

All of this comes as both Republicans and Democrats try to either remove or keep in place third party candidates that will benefit them. It's a damn shame too and shows that the two party system needs to be changed bigly. It won't happen until people wise up.

[Mercov]

Pennsylvania's Supreme Court has rejected Cornel West's bid to get on the ballot, saying West’s campaign lacked the required affidavits for 14 of West’s 19 presidential electors. Mail-in ballots are now being printed and will be sent out. The removal of West will undoubtedly help Harris, who is in a tight race with Trump. RFK Jr.'s name was dropped from the ballot after he withdrew from the race. And in Georgia, in another reversal, votes for West and Claudia De la Cruz will count on the ballot after the State's Supreme Court paused their disqualification.

All of this comes as both Republicans and Democrats try to either remove or keep in place third party candidates that will benefit them. It's a damn shame too and shows that the two party system needs to be changed bigly. It won't happen until people wise up.

I havent heard much about La Cruz and the PSL this cycle. I am surprised they haven't fallen with CPUSA endorsing Harris, though they have always been a bit more independent.

[Corporate Collective Salvation]

Clinton and Harris are both pieces of shit.

How?

I would not put it so crudely, but for myself, Kamala Harris is not a qualified woman.
She has been a little liked and wanted, poorly qualified, and under performing asset in most of her posts, but has benefited from cosmetic features, and being one of few choices in a small room of a party apparatus that does not promote on merit.
God be with her, and preserve us.

Hillary Clinton is like a reincarnation of Edith Wilson.
A power monger more covetous, and less gracious in her use of power than her husband.
Of such rank character that she did not bat an eye at throwing her own sex under the bus, or her husband’s crotch, at least, enabling his sometimes violent proclivities for the sake of preserving a meal ticket til she could firmly establish her own secure whoredom that thrived on the selling of her positions that routinely compromised her countrymen for the sake of graft with foreign marks, and culminated in an unprecedented campaign that would commit government assets in alliance with the press to engage in illegal espionage against and narrative fabrication around a private citizen competing for office.
God really dropped the ball with this one.