#paul waldman
Text
Don't risk a rerun of the 2000 election.
In the first presidential election of the 21st century many deluded progressives voted for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader.
Their foolishness gave us eight years of George W. Bush who plagued the country with two recessions (including the Great Recession) and two wars (one totally unnecessary and one which could have been avoided if he heeded an intelligence brief 5 weeks before 9/11).
Oh yeah, Dubya also appointed one conservative and one batshit crazy reactionary to the US Supreme Court. Roberts and Alito are still there.
Paul Waldman of the Washington Post offers some thoughts.
Why leftists should work their hearts out for Biden in 2024
Ask a Democrat with a long memory what the numbers 97,488 and 537 represent, and their face will twist into a grimace. The first is the number of votes Ralph Nader received in Florida in 2000 as the nominee of the Green Party; the second is the margin by which George W. Bush was eventually certified the winner of the state, handing him the White House.
Now, with President Biden gearing up for reelection, talk of a spoiler candidate from the left is again in the air. That’s unfortunate, because here’s the truth: The past 2½ years under Biden have been a triumph for progressivism, even if it’s not in most people’s interest to admit it.
This was not what most people expected from Biden, who ran as a relative moderate in the 2020 Democratic primary. His nomination was a victory for pragmatism with its eyes directed toward the center.
But today, no one can honestly deny that Biden is the most progressive president since at least Lyndon B. Johnson. His judicial appointments are more diverse than those of any of his predecessors. He has directed more resources to combating climate change than any other president. Notwithstanding the opposition from the Supreme Court, his administration has moved aggressively to forgive and restructure student loans.
Three years ago the economy was in horrible shape because of Trump's mishandling of the pandemic. Now unemployment is steadily below 4%, job creation continues to exceed expectations, and wages are rising as unions gain strength. The post-pandemic, post-Afghan War inflation rate has receded to near normal levels; people in the 1970s would have sold their souls for a 3.2% (and dropping) inflation rate. And many of the effects of "Bidenomics" have yet to kick in.
And in a story that is criminally underappreciated, his administration’s policy reaction to the covid-induced recession of 2020 was revolutionary in precisely the ways any good leftist should favor. It embraced massive government intervention to stave off the worst economic impacts, including handing millions of families monthly checks (by expanding the child tax credit), giving all kids in public schools free meals, boosting unemployment insurance and extending health coverage to millions.
It worked. While inflation rose (as it did worldwide), the economy’s recovery has been blisteringly fast. It took more than six years for employment rates to return to what they were before the Great Recession hit in 2008, but we surpassed January 2020 jobs levels by the spring of 2022 — and have kept adding jobs ever since.
To the idealistic leftist, that might feel like both old news and a partial victory at best. What about everything supporters of Bernie Sanders have found so thrilling about the Vermont senator’s vision of the future, from universal health care to free college?
It’s true Biden was never going to deliver that, but to be honest, neither would Sanders had he been elected president. And that brings me to the heart of how people on the left ought to think about Biden and his reelection.
Biden has gotten things done. The US economy is doing better than those of almost every other advanced industrialized country.
Our rivals China and Russia are both worse off than they were three years ago. And NATO is not just united, it's growing.
Sadly, we still need to deal with a far right MAGA cult at home who would wreck the country just to get its own way.
Biden may be elderly and unexciting, but that is one of the reasons he won in 2020. Many people just wanted an end to the daily drama of Trump's capricious and incompetent rule by tweet. And a good portion of those people live in places that count greatly in elections – suburbs and exurbs.
Superhero films seem to be slipping in popularity. Hopefully that's a sign that voters are less likely to embrace self-appointed political messiahs to save them from themselves.
Good governance is a steady process – not a collection of magic tricks. Experienced and competent individuals who are not too far removed from the lives of the people they represent are the best people to have in government.
Paul Waldman concludes his column speaking from the heart as a liberal...
I’ve been in and around politics for many years, and even among liberals, I’ve almost always been one of the most liberal people in the room. Yet only since Biden’s election have I realized that I will probably never see a president as liberal as I’d like.
It’s not an easy idea to make peace with. But it suggests a different way of thinking about elections — as one necessary step in a long, difficult process. The further you are to the left, the more important Biden’s reelection ought to be to you. It might require emotional (and policy) compromise, but for now, it’s also the most important tool you have to achieve progressive ends.
Exactly. Rightwingers take the long view. It took them 49 years but they eventually got Roe v. Wade overturned. To succeed, we need to look upon politics as an extended marathon rather as one short sprint.
Republicans may currently be bickering, but they will most likely unite behind whichever anti-abortion extremist they nominate.
It's necessary to get the word out now that the only way to defeat climate-denying, abortion-restricting, assault weapon-loving, race-baiting, homophobic Republicans is to vote Democratic.
#paul waldman#liberalism#election 2000#election 2024#joe biden#third parties#vote blue no matter who#donald trump#dumpster fire#trumpster fire#fascism vs. democracy#nra republicans#abortion#climate change#lgbtq+ rights#race-baiting#take the political long view#phil hands
493 notes
·
View notes
Text
Apocalyptic rhetoric is just as dangerous as the violent kind
Paul Waldman is absolutely correct about how the Republican's "apocalyptic rhetoric" about the Democrats could ultimately lead to violence just as much as the violent rhetoric. The GOP frames Democrats now as deliberately wanting to "destroy" America. (Ironically, it is the GOP who have turned toward autocracy and seem determined on establishing one party rule at all costs. This suggests that once again, Republicans are projecting onto Democrats.)
“I cannot stand these people that are destroying our country,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to a crowd of Donald Trump’s supporters at the Iowa State Fair this past weekend while the former president looked on approvingly. Gaetz then added: “Only through force do we make any change in a corrupt town like Washington, D.C.”
The second part of that statement made headlines, as it’s not every day that a member of Congress advocates “force” to achieve political goals. But the first part ought to be just as troubling, because the two parts operate together. The idea that our opponents are purposely attempting to lay waste to America is often the justification for all kinds of radical action — violence very much included.
Barely a day goes by without prominent Republicans repeating that claim. Trump regularly says his political opponents will “destroy the country,” or have already nearly destroyed it. It’s a staple of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s rhetoric. “If woke ideology takes over, it will destroy this country,” DeSantis says. If President Biden is reelected, the governor insists, “the left is gonna absolutely destroy this country.”
[...]
Yes, liberals have made dire warnings about a second Trump presidency. But that’s unique to Trump, who actually tried to overturn a lawful election and retain power, and last year called for the “termination” of the Constitution. So the assertion that if he became president it could mean the end of democracy is at least not too far-fetched.*
The talk of the United States ending its run some time in the next few years because Democrats passed some modest expansion of health coverage or kept pushing for a transition to green energy, on the other hand, is bonkers. Yet, unlike other kinds of rhetorical calls to extremism, we don’t police it at all.
Journalists tend to be very attuned to hints of political violence. When a candidate says he wants to start “slitting throats” in the federal government, as DeSantis recently did, we condemn it and explore its troubling implications. We press Republican contenders to admit that Biden fairly won the 2020 election and to repudiate the violent insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021.
In contrast, we treat partisan apocalyptic rhetoric as mere hyperbole. But it’s the premise that turns anger into action. If you actually believed your opponents were literally trying to destroy your country, what wouldn’t be justified? Threatening election officials? Storming the Capitol? Assassinations?
You might protest that Republican politicians don’t really believe this talk. But clearly, many of their supporters do. Which is no surprise given how often they’re told that it’s true.
[...]
Any rational Republican knows the truth about the next election: If Biden wins, it will mean nothing more than four years of policies they don’t like. That will be deeply unpleasant for them. But it won’t mean the end of America, and they shouldn’t be allowed to say so without challenge.
We ought to treat apocalyptic rhetoric just like we treat violent rhetoric: Take note of it, condemn it, challenge candidates to defend it, and explain the threat it poses. Why? Because many of the voters who are listening think the Republicans spinning out wild tales of America’s imminent destruction mean what they say.
[emphasis added]
____________
*In my opinion it isn't just Trump, many on the left have legitimate concerns about extreme right-wing Republicans like DeSantis and white Christian nationalists who seem to want autocracy/ one-party rule because they have either said and/or shown that they do.
#republicans#apocalyptic rhetoric#gop lies about democrats can indirectly lead to violence#donald trump#paul waldman#the washington post
458 notes
·
View notes
Text
"When it comes to rural resentments, again and again these scholars insist that if rural whites are mad, it’s only because they have good reason to be. We are hardly unaware of the sufferings of rural America, many of which are born from late-stage capitalism. In fact, we dedicate the second chapter of our book to the causes and consequences of declining economic opportunities, outmigration of ambitious young people, hospital and pharmacy closures, and other very serious problems that pervade rural American communities, white and nonwhite alike. In our reporting, we heard many moving stories about the challenges rural communities face.
"What isn’t said enough is that rural whites are being told to blame all the wrong people for their very real problems. As we argue in the book, Hollywood liberals didn’t destroy the family farm, college professors didn’t move manufacturing jobs overseas, immigrants didn’t pour opioids into rural communities, and critical race theory didn’t close hundreds of rural hospitals. When Republican politicians and the conservative media tell rural whites to aim their anger at those targets, it’s so they won’t ask why the people they keep electing haven’t done anything to improve life in their communities. "
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Next presidential race will be all about anxious masculinity
By Paul Waldman
The Washington Post
Like a political version of those supplements that promise a “unique man-boosting formula,” Republican politicians are preparing to run for president on a warning and a promise: American manhood is threatened as never before, but they can lead its restoration.
Take, for example, former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, who has launched a campaign to end “wokeness” in the military. “A woke military is a weak military,” he says.
This is just one manifestation of the widespread fear on the right that in every way, even in its armed forces, America is being feminized. Or as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said last year when admiring a testosterone-fueled Russian army recruitment video, “Perhaps a woke, emasculated military is not the best idea.”
The recent performance of that Russian army, which is definitely not woke but has failed disastrously in Ukraine, might suggest that a military that is nimble, technologically sophisticated and drawn from diverse array of talent will be the most effective in the 21st century. But for these politicians, the point isn’t to have a nuanced debate about military strategy.
It’s to position themselves as the champions of a kind of gender rollback. If we can just stop worrying about pronouns, shove LGBTQ people back into the closet and get in touch with our inner silverback gorillas, the world will make sense again.
Sooner or later, every Republican presidential candidate will stand up in favor of “traditional” masculinity. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri has a book coming out next spring – timed for the beginning of the presidential campaign – titled “Manhood: The Masculine Virtues America Needs.”
It’s unclear what Hawley believes manhood should consist of. Last year, he gave a speech on “the left’s attack on men in America” but said almost nothing about what men ought to be, beyond lauding “courage and independence and assertiveness.”
We do have one model of manhood we know Republicans thrill to: that of former president Donald Trump. He was an indifferent father who had five children with three women without, apparently, participating much in any of their upbringings. (“I’ll supply funds and she’ll take care of the kids. It’s not like I’m gonna be walking the kids down Central Park,” he once said.) Outside of the golf course, Trump possesses no physical prowess or mastery of the kind of tasks “traditional” men are supposed to be capable of; it’s hard to imagine him changing a lightbulb, let alone building or fixing anything with his hands.
Yet he does embody a particular kind of manhood: He’s a bully. He glorifies violence. He objectifies women (and two dozen of them have accused him of sexual harassment, though he denies this). To him, every interaction is a contest in which the only choice is to dominate or be dominated. So when his fans Photoshop his head atop a muscle-bound body wielding an assault rifle, they’re saying this is the version of manhood to which they aspire.
There is no question that gender roles and expectations are in flux. Of course, gender roles are always changing, and that change is always accompanied by frantic warnings that men are being feminized. (Here’s an amusing newspaper article from 1902 lamenting that men were adopting “the hateful style of parting the hair in the middle,” which showed we were failing to “cultivate strong manhood on American soil.”)
But change seems to be coming particularly quickly in the last few years as young people explore new ways of thinking about gender. If you’ve always accepted that you were at the top of a hierarchy and now people are trying to break it down, you might feel threatened. If you aren’t sure you have the tools to maintain your position, you might feel panicked.
The further we get from the days when societal status was settled with contests of upper-body strength, the more urgently some men feel they must proclaim that their special value comes from their manhood.
Those men will have no shortage of politicians telling them that masculinity can be restored by the right presidential candidate. It’s an elemental appeal, one that reaches down to where their fears and resentments lie. And it has about as much ability to deliver on its promises as those man-boosting supplements.
#Republicans#GOP#fragile masculinity#manhood#gender roles#pronouns#LGBTQ+#scared men#misogyny#Paul Waldman
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Are Democrats Really Clueless About Impending Election Doom?
Are Democrats Really Clueless About Impending Election Doom?
The following article was first published by Common Dreams on June 29, 2022
Norman Mathews
Armageddon comes November 8. Pundits and progressives have been warning Democrats for months that if they don’t change course and achieve significant legislation promised in 2020, they will go down in flames on election day, along with our democracy. The tone of these warnings is imbued with the implication…
View On WordPress
#Broadway music#Center for Biological Diversity#Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee#Democrats#Elections#James Clyburn#Jeff Weaver#Joe Biden#Nancy Pelosi#Paul Waldman#Politics
0 notes
Text
Glenda Jackson as Charlotte Corday in The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton Under the Direction of the Marquis De Sade, 1967, 1986
#art#theater#glenda jackson#charlotte corday#black and white#max waldman#1960s#1980s#nuns#plays#vintage#marat#jean-paul marat#marquis de sade#royal shakespeare company#marat/sade
86 notes
·
View notes
Text
misc readings
On books and reading!
Reading insecurity, katy waldman, slate
The deep space of digital reading, paul la farge, nautilus
The curse of reading and forgetting, ian crouch, new yorker
Why read the classics, italo calvino (pdf)
How reading is like love: italo calvino on the ecstasy of surrendering to other dimensions of experience, the marginalian
Just read the book already, lauren miller, slate
Treasure the books no one else seems to love, molly templeton, tor
Papyralysis, jacob mikanowski, los angeles review of books
How to nurture a personal library, freya howarth, psyche
Brief notes on the art and manner of arranging one's books, georges perec
If I don't remember what I read, did I read it at all? molly templeton, tor
Never do that to a book, anne fadiman, slate
Mary oliver on how reading saved her life and the greatest antidote to sorrow, the marginalian
On the pleasures and solitudes of quiet books, emily st. john mandel, the millions
Being a better online reader, maria konnikova, new yorker
How 11 writers organize their personal libraries, emily temple, literary hub
How many errorrs are in this essay? ed simon, the millions
Adrienne rich on resistance, the liberating power of storytelling, and how reading emancipates, the marginalian
How we read series, wired
Fiction detective: on literary citation and search engine sleuthing, sophie haigney, the drift
our autofiction fixation, jessica winter, the new york times
3K notes
·
View notes
Text
Max Waldman Paul Sanasardo Dancing his Own "Pain," New York City 1970
84 notes
·
View notes
Text
53 notes
·
View notes
Text
Looking for a Republican who is moderate on abortion???
Then definitely forget Nikki Haley.
It's a no-brainer: You don't get to be the GOP governor of South Carolina nor a member of the Trump administration by supporting reproductive freedom.
Paul Waldman at the Washington Post shines a light on Haley's views and how she'd act as president. (emphasis added)
[A]nyone tempted to believe Haley is a moderate on abortion should be warned: She isn't.
Haley's approach is likely to be adopted by the GOP presidential nominee — even if that person isn’t Haley herself. But that will be just as misleading because no Republican administration will seek a moderate course on abortion. It will adopt an extreme right-wing stance in ways that right now are being ignored.
[ … ]
Haley, meanwhile, delivered lines she uses frequently, calibrated to sound sensible and sympathetic: "Don’t make women feel like they have to decide on this issue," she said, "when you know we don’t have 60 Senate votes" to overcome an inevitable filibuster of a national ban. She argued that legislation should focus on areas of potential "consensus," such as a ban on late-term abortions and allowing medical personnel to refuse to participate in procedures they object to.
[ … ]
Haley is on record supporting a national ban, even if she acknowledges it wouldn’t pass. That means her real plan is to enact a series of steps limiting abortion access, leading up to a national ban as soon as Republicans have the votes to enact it.
[ … ]
The judges President Haley would appoint would also not be abortion moderates; they would almost certainly come from the Federalist Society’s judicial pipeline to guarantee their conservative bona fides, especially on abortion. Even if she wanted to appoint moderate judges (and there’s no indication she does), it would trigger a revolt within her party. In fact, it’s unlikely anyone she appoints to any high position in the federal government with an influence over health care would be pro-choice.
No Republican president in this century has appointed a US Supreme Court justice who supports reproductive freedom. Despite the soothing double-talk we hear from Haley, she would be no different.
Supporting reproductive freedom means voting Democratic in federal elections and never missing an election. If there are any moderate GOP office holders left in DC they would only tell you so in some back alley after scanning the area for listening devices.
So let people know, starting now, that a vote for Republicans (including Nikki Haley) is a vote against a woman's right to choose.
#republicans#nikki haley#abortion#the fallacy of 'moderate' republicans#the gop#the sanctity of reproductive freedom#a woman's right to choose#roe v. wade#dobbs v. jackson women's health organization#scotus#us supreme court#republican nomination for president#election 2024#paul waldman
21 notes
·
View notes
Quote
You could argue that the rural whites who have been electing Republicans ought to elect Democrats. But at the very least, they ought to get themselves better Republicans. They need to start demanding more. There's many politically barren places where the Democrats don't go because they're never going to win and Republicans barely go because they know that they're always going to win. That population is not demanding anything of Republicans. Republicans come in at the end of the campaign and say, "Don't you hate liberals? Yeah, me too." And then they vote those people back into office. They need to start saying to their Republican representatives, "What are you actually doing for us? Are you improving the quality of our lives? Look at our communities and what have happened to them! What are you doing about it?"
Paul Waldman, interviewed in Salon.com
11 notes
·
View notes
Text
The Assassination of Amber Heard. “If you were being strangled, would you… | by Hannah Summers | May, 2022 | Medium
Once the couple reached their divorce settlement, they released a joint statement, agreeing “Neither party has made false accusations for financial gain.” I was relieved to see Depp admitted that Amber’s allegations weren’t false, and assumed that would be the end of that.
To my horror and disbelief, a new hashtag soon began trending on Twitter — #JohnnyDeppisInnocent (which would later become the infamous #JusticeForJohnnyDepp). That was my first brush with the abuse apologists who have dominated social media over the last few years, swarming anyone who dares to question Depp’s innocence with abuse and vitriol. Little did I know, it was just the beginning.
Amber Heard never claimed to be a perfect victim. She never said she didn’t fight back or hit Johnny — in fact in her 2016 deposition, she admitted to just that. When you are living in an abusive situation, your brain is in constant panic mode. You become the most toxic version of yourself. Like an animal backed into a corner, you do what it takes to survive. Amber was recorded saying to Johnny, “Please, I’m begging you to stop. I feel like I have a heart attack almost every day. You’re killing me.”
“If you were being strangled, would you or would you not try to save your life any way you could? Ask yourself if you would encourage your daughters or sisters to not try to keep their lives when someone was attacking them yet again.”
However, in late 2018 Depp’s lawyer Adam Waldman — famous for his shady links to Russian oligarchs and disinformation campaigns including the 2016 election — released a statement claiming Johnny Depp was a victim of domestic abuse: Depp would sue both Heard and The Sun in the US and UK respectively for defamatory statements. And in January 2020, an edited, out of context audio was strategically leaked by Waldman. Amber’s words were both misquoted and misconstrued as her taunting Johnny for being an abuse victim, when the correct transcript and full recording hears her sobbing over the phone, telling Depp she thought he was going to kill her and refuting Depp’s excuse for his violence — that it was a ‘fair fight’, so he was a victim too. Waldman was kicked off the US defamation case for leaking evidence, but the damage was done.
Depp’s fans, Men’s Rights Activists, and even some misguided feminists went feral for this recording. Johnny Depp became the poster boy for male abuse victims, and Amber for female abusers. The doctored transcripts and edited audio recordings went viral on Twitter, and Heard became public enemy №1. The internet was no longer safe for her.
Never mind that texts from Depp to actor Paul Bettany proved he already had sexually violent murder fantasies about Heard — drowning her and burning her alive and raping her burnt corpse. Never mind the video of Depp shouting, smashing glasses, kicking doors and slamming cabinets, something aggressive enough for a domestic violence charge in other US states. Never mind that Amber’s medical records noted her injuries and had documented the attacks. Never mind that Heard already had pictures of her bruises with confirmed metadata — but of course the narrative then changed from Photoshop to special effects makeup. Amber was now an abuser, and Johnny her victim.
154 notes
·
View notes
Text
Supporters of #NoHostageLeftBehind Open Letter to Joe Biden - Part 2/2
Gabe Turner
Gail Berman
Gary Barber
Genevieve Angelson
Gideon Raff
Grant Singer
Greg Berlanti
Guy Nattiv
Hannah Fidell
Hannah Graf
Harlan Coben
Harold Brown
Henrietta Conrad
Howard Gordon
Iain Morris
Imran Ahmed
Inbar Lavi
Jackie Sandler
Jake Graf
Jake Kasdan
Jamie Ray Newman
Jaron Varsano
Jason Fuchs
Jason Biggs & Jenny Mollen Biggs
Jason Segel
JD Lifshitz
Jeff Rake
Jen Joel
Jeremy Piven
Jesse Itzler
Jesse Sisgold
Jill Littman
Jody Gerson
Joe Hipps
Joe Quinn
Joe Russo
Joe Tippett
Joel Fields
John Landgraf
Jon Bernthal
Jon Glickman
Jon Liebman
Jonathan Baruch
Jonathan Groff
Jonathan Tropper
Jonathan Marc Sherman
Jonathan Steinberg
Jonathan Tisch
Josh Goldstine
Josh Greenstein
Josh Grode
Julia Lester
Julie Greenwald
Karen Pollock
Kelley Lynch
Kevin Kane
Kevin Zegers
Kitao Sakurai
KJ Steinberg
Laura Pradelska
Lauren Schuker Blum
Laurence Mark
Laurie David
Lee Eisenberg
Leslie Siebert
Leo Pearlman
Limor Gott
Lina Esco
Liz Garbus
Lizanne Rosenstein
Lizzie Tisch
Lorraine Schwartz
Lynn Harris
Lyor Cohen
Mandana Dayani
Maria Dizzia
Mara Buxbaum
Marc Webb
Marco Perego
Mark Feuerstein
Mark Shedletsky
Mark Scheinberg
Mathew Rosengart
Matt Lucas
Matt Miller
Matthew Bronfman
Matthew Hiltzik
Matti Leshem
Dame Maureen Lipman
Max Mutchnik
Maya Lasry
Meaghan Oppenheimer
Melissa Zukerman
Michael Ellenberg
Michael Aloni
Michael Green
Michael Rapino
Michael Weber
Mike Medavoy
Mimi Leder
Modi Wiczyk
Nancy Josephson
Natasha Leggero
Neil Blair
Neil Druckmann
Nicole Avant
Nina Jacobson
Noa Kirel
Noah Oppenheim
Noreena Hertz
Odeya Rush
Oran Zegman
Pasha Kovalev
Paul Haas
Paul Pflug
Peter Traugott
Rachel Riley
Rafi Marmor
Ram Bergman
Raphael Margulies
Rebecca Angelo
Rebecca Mall
Reinaldo Marcus Green
Rich Statter
Richard Kind
Rick Hoffman
Rick Rosen
Robert Newman
Rob Rinder
Roger Birnbaum
Roger Green
Rosie O'Donnell
Ryan Feldman
Sam Trammell
Sarah Baker
Sarah Bremner
Sarah Treem
Scott Tenley
Seth Oster
Scott Braun
Scott Neustadter
Shannon Watts
Shari Redstone
Sharon Jackson
Shauna Perlman
Shawn Levy
Sheila Nevins
Simon Sebag Montefiore
Simon Tikhman
Skylar Astin
Stacey Snider
Stephen Fry
Steve Agee
Steve Rifkind
Susanna Felleman
Susie Arons
Todd Lieberman
Todd Moscowitz
Todd Waldman
Tom Freston
Tom Werner
Tomer Capone
Tracy Ann Oberman
Trudie Styler
Tyler James Williams
Vanessa Bayer
Veronica Grazer
Veronica Smiley
Whitney Wolfe Herd
Will Graham
Yamanieka Saunders
Yariv Milchan
Ynon Kreiz
3 notes
·
View notes
Note
Yeah, guess it’s not well known that the Daily Wire spent thousands on social media adverts against AH, or about JD’s extremely shady lawyer Adam Waldman, who has ties to Russian oligarch Deripaska who was business partners with Paul Manafort, aka Trumps campaign manager who is literally IN JAIL for Russian interference in the 2016 election. It’s so obvious that JD’s team is just using the same alt-right disinfo methods as say, qanon, & they’re depressingly effective on the general population.
And I really wish this would be signal boosted more because it is very weird and very unsettling. Like, the fact that Benny Sharpino is single-handedly trying to make this into an MRA tidal wave and the fact that it's actually working is scary.
22 notes
·
View notes
Text
... Over the past decade Democrats have increased their vote totals in cities and suburbs, but lost votes in both rural areas and small and midsize counties where manufacturing is critical. Their decline in those places has shifted the political landscape of the Midwest in particular, making states Democrats (sometimes) win closer than they used to be and putting states such as Ohio seemingly out of reach.
[...]
Republicans can get away with doing absolutely nothing to help people in these places; all it takes is poking at their resentments and anger to win them over. Democrats, on the other hand, have to do everything: offer tangible results, bulletproof authenticity and a convincing story about the past, and the future, that overcomes their reluctance to vote Democratic.
It can be done. But it sure won’t be easy.
–"John Fetterman shows the challenge Democrats face in middle America" by Paul Waldman
#links#john fetterman#politics#this is what I've been saying!!!#they tend conservative and the Dems are too socially liberal for them#like quite bluntly#I'm not saying Dems are WRONG in being socially liberal before someone jumps down my throat#I'm saying that people disagree with. us
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
However, in late 2018 Depp’s lawyer Adam Waldman — famous for his shady links to Russian oligarchs and disinformation campaigns including the 2016 election — released a statement claiming Johnny Depp was a victim of domestic abuse: Depp would sue both Heard and The Sun in the US and UK respectively for defamatory statements. And in January 2020, an edited, out of context audio was strategically leaked by Waldman. Amber’s words were both misquoted and misconstrued as her taunting Johnny for being an abuse victim, when the correct transcript and full recording hears her sobbing over the phone, telling Depp she thought he was going to kill her and refuting Depp’s excuse for his violence — that it was a ‘fair fight’, so he was a victim too. Waldman was kicked off the US defamation case for leaking evidence, but the damage was done.
Depp’s fans, Men’s Rights Activists, and even some misguided feminists went feral for this recording. Johnny Depp became the poster boy for male abuse victims, and Amber for female abusers. The doctored transcripts and edited audio recordings went viral on Twitter, and Heard became public enemy №1. The internet was no longer safe for her.
Never mind that texts from Depp to actor Paul Bettany proved he already had sexually violent murder fantasies about Heard — drowning her and burning her alive and raping her burnt corpse. Never mind the video of Depp shouting, smashing glasses, kicking doors and slamming cabinets, something aggressive enough for a domestic violence charge in other US states. Never mind that Amber’s medical records noted her injuries and had documented the attacks. Never mind that Heard already had pictures of her bruises with confirmed metadata — but of course the narrative then changed from Photoshop to special effects makeup. Amber was now an abuser, and Johnny her victim.
#read this pls#seeing how ppl have reacted to this case this past week has made me sick to my stomach#making memes and even selling goods inspired by this case like...#wtf is wrong with you#i believe amber heard#violence#abuse#rape#domestic violence#amber heard#johnny depp
6 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
tsundereition
let's go to wonderland
beginneroffinancialwealth13
IN THE END
seeevittsart
Seeevittsart
ironcowboygalaxy
Untitled