For the Dem Readers

~ Clarissa

I have a message for the readers who voted for Harris.

You are good people, and I respect your choice. I know you want what’s best. Good, decent, kind people is what you are. You have to notice, though, that, as The New York Times reports, over 90% of counties where votes have been counted so far have shifted rightward. This means that your message is not landing. It’s time to reassess.

For the past quarter century, the overwhelming majority of Americans of all political persuasions have consistently wanted less immigration. You need to start listening. “Bipartisan immigration amnesties” will not work. Only real results will.

Also, you’ve got to quit it with the “first woman of color” and all that. We’ve already had the first black president. Twice. You can’t keep milking minority identities for symbolic value. That milestone has been achieved. Let’s move on.

The pronouns, the 32 genders, and the rest of the DEI hobby horses are turning people off. It’s time to leave it in the past as a temporary delusion and concentrate on what’s real.

There’s a lot more that needs to be abandoned but even just these 3 things will make an enormous difference. We will all be happier, you will be happier, if you see that you’ve gone off course and need to correct.

This can be a moment to celebrate because it’s always good to have a definitive answer whether something is working or not. The points I named are not working for you or the country at large. Let the new era begin, and we’ll all win as a result.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Clarissa

64 thoughts on “For the Dem Readers”

  1. YES!

    Win elections by listening, and responding to, the concerns of actual American voters, instead of just trying to badger them into ignoring their own interests and changing their whole outlook to match the party line. This is what representative government is supposed to be about: we elect people to represent us, not to manipulate us.

    It’d be the best possible outcome for the whole country.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. Even Trump will have to pass a type of amnesty at some point before his term is over. Nobody I know believes that he can deport 13 million (or more) people who have been here for decades without breaking something in the economy. But, as we’ve all seen, he owns the issue now. His gambit to kill the old bill paid off, so he’ll have to come up with a new one that can pass both houses (of Dems keep the House).

    Like

    Reply
    1. So you think, this is proof the economy is good enough despite massive problems? I think most people who voted think the economy is bad and horrible and already broken will be moved by “deporting 13 million people will break something in the economy”
    2. Nah. What amnesty? Nobody is making Trump do anything now. BIG If Democrats keep the house. They look pretty dead as a political party. Mike Johnson would stay Speaker. He owes his position to MTG. She’s personally on board with sending her l33t squad of Cross Fitters to roust people from their dwellings. Or bridges. Or the prisons.
    3. Prisons are cheap labor so costs can stay down and things can be made in America, making productivity rise so much more. It’s going to make AI look like an abacus. It really depends. Lots of prison labor or lots of deportations. It’s going to be great for all those those small towns with jails, that’ll get more representation without having to listen to all of those pesky felons or their rights or what they want. Just think your customer service call can be answered by a real American who speaks English instead of a robot. Sure it’s from inside the Maricopa county jail but we can’t have everything.

    Like

    Reply

      2. The incessant beating of the “convicted felon” horse clearly didn’t work. Harris lost the election. So what’s the point of beating this drum some more? To feel morally superior? That strategy has already lost. Why not reassess, regroup, and do something different? Why waste time and energy on something that is clearly not working?

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. It’s not meant to “work”. It’s just stating a fact. He’s our first convicted felon president. We might as well get used to it. I don’t mind it, as long as it helps de-stigmatize felonies in general. There shouldn’t be a stigma about being a felon anyway. But guess which party insists that felons shouldn’t vote? Or which states discriminate against employing them? Not the Democrats! Anyway, let felons live; they’re just like us. But he is a felon. There is no running from it.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Even if he was a spy, like all of these Democratic operatives kept saying or implying, it hardly disqualifies him on paper.

            For example:

            Jonathan Pollard still has U.S. citizenship, and presumably can still vote. He is a natural born citizen, so he can still run for President.

            If your response is some variation of “I don’t think that was really a crime or a big deal” is not the same as “he didn’t commit a crime.” The court of public opinion is not the same as the law.

            Like

            Reply

            1. Cliff Notes (there’s so much more at the link):

              Jonathan Pollard was convicted and jailed for spying for Israel against the United States in 1987. Israel admitted to paying him in 1998. There was a concerted campaign to free him. But also, many former government officials are convinced the information he sold ended up in the USSR’s hands. He was released in 2015. But apparently spying for another country in the way Pollard did is not treasonous? Pollard has both U.S. and Israeli citizenship.

              Eg:

              Ā The government alleged that Pollard used classified documents to unsuccessfully broker an arms deal with the governments of South Africa,Ā Argentina, andĀ Taiwan. FBIĀ investigators also determined that Pollard met with three Pakistanis and an Iranian foreigner in an attempt to broker arms in 1985.

              ...When asked to return the stolen material, the Israelis reportedly supplied only a few dozen less sensitive documents.Ā At the time, the Americans knew that Pollard had passed tens of thousands of documents.

              But based on that precedent, you can’t really expect the law to have ever touched Trump.

              And Trump issued a pardon to that man on the last day of his term, by the way.

              Like

              Reply

          2. Exactly, Old Reader. “Administrative overreach” my old lady’s corset cover. He’s a convicted felon because he committed a felony and got convicted. If we’re going to reassess, and indeed we should, we have to be clear-headed and honest, and that includes calling a felon a felon (and a sexual assaulter a sexual assaulter, and a fraud a fraud…).

            This whole left/dems messing up our message thing: it’s a bit like parenting. If you lecture, hector, threaten, insult, and condescend, there’s a pretty good chance you’re going to get results from your kids scarily different than what you wanted. We’ve got about 71 million pissed off, unruly kids–we failed to convince them what was best. So they need to get what they’ve demanded… good and hard.

            Personally, I’m largely in a position where I’ve used up nearly all of my fucks to give, with the notable exception of the rights of my family, particularly my daughters. Mess with those, and the mincing queen you poke becomes a very angry bear, indeed.

            Like

            Reply

              1. I certainly hope they stay in that rut!

                Definitely keep insulting Americans and insisting voters don’t know their own interests.

                Never, ever try to figure out what it is that people *want* from their government. You know, people other than you. And definitely never look outside your class or tax bracket to see what it is that’s important to other people who vote.

                By all means, continue the march to total irrelevance.

                Liked by 1 person

              2. I would submit that some element of infantilizing and insulting is part of any election campaign process. Part of my point was that it isn’t a good idea to insult, but Dems do have a way of being off-putting about being Morally Sound. But it’s not really a matter of “our side doesn’t insult potential voters and yours does.” It’s more a matter of, “We can make it look as if we understand.”

                Not that it’s easy or foolproof. I mean, I was thoroughly insulted by Trump Bibles, Trump Sneakers, that incredibly silly campaign commercial where’s he’s some kind of superhero, marketing his ridiculous mug shot, the McDonald’s stunt and the garbage stunt. But I was an outlier–the message landed perfectly for more than enough people. Was that proof that someone was finding out what was important to voters and treating them intelligently? Well, no. It was, “we’re insulting you, but we’re going to make you think we’re empowering you.”

                It goes back further than Reagan–it’s P.T. Barnum, and Trump is the 21st century’s greatest humbug. (There’s a great story in the Free Press about the Art of Bullshit that covers this very well.) Or if you’re inclined toward musical theatre, Trump is Prof. Harold Hill from The Music Man, convincing enough voters that they’ve got Trouble.

                The Democrats had a pretty good humbugger with Clinton, but not really since.

                Like

              3. How can you be insulted by speakers? I’m asking in all seriousness. Did they have something written on them? I missed that story.

                Also, why is the McDonald’s thing more insulting than any regular politician activities like holding babies or pretending to buy Doritos? You can dislike it or find it boring but how can it insult you?

                Like

              4. I also think that people who vote differently from me aren’t childish, stupid, immoral or inferior. They see things differently than I do. I respect that. Isn’t that actual, real tolerance?

                Like

              2. Well, to replay summer’s greatest hits, let’s visit CBS News:

                Under New York law, falsification of business records is a crime when the records are altered with an intent to defraud. To be charged as a felony, prosecutors must also show that the offender intended to “commit another crime” or “aid or conceal” another crime when falsifying records.

                In Trump’s case, prosecutors said that other crime was a violation of a New York election law that makes it illegal for “any two or more persons” to “conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means,” as Justice Juan Merchan explained in his instructions to the jury.

                What exactly those “unlawful means” were in this case was up to the jury to decide. Prosecutors put forth three areas that they could consider: a violation of federal campaign finance laws, falsification of other business records or a violation of tax laws. 

                Jurors did not need to agree on what the underlying “unlawful means” were. But they did have to unanimously conclude that Trump caused the business records to be falsified, and that he “did so with intent to defraud that included an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”Ā (end of CBS News quote.)

                Where the “outrage” and the questions of, “but what was the felony” occur is this “unlawful means” business. But the fact that there were unlawful means was unanimously agreed upon by the jury, and that’s great. When prosecutors deal with a low-quality gangster, they get creative. And it will turn out to be the only time that Trump faces anything resembling accountability, since we’ve now elected him either King or President-for-Life, however you want to look at it.

                Like

              4. “Who, precisely, was defrauded?”

                *cue dramatic music, tight close-up on kindly old Col. Potter*

                We were. We were.

                *music swells*

                Or at least, he tried to. But as a very wise person once said, “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”

                *theme music gradually becomes “America, the Beautiful”*

                God bless the U.S.A.

                *fade to black*

                *end credits*

                Like

            3. I keep asking what rights women are in danger of losing under a Trump administration and nobody can answer with any policy or data points. I get some kind of jazz hands about abortion or bodily autonomy but Dems don’t actually believe in bodily autonomy as per their support for mandated medical interventions and Trump can’t issue a federal abortion ban because the Supreme Court ruled that it was a state level matter.

              I have three daughters and I have way more concerns about their ability to access women’s-only spaces if they need them. It’s not an academic question either–it’s very concerning how many all gender bathrooms and changing spaces there are here.

              Liked by 2 people

              Reply

              1. A local public high school spent some insane amount of money this summer to remodel the bathrooms. They are now all-gender. This was done to accommodate the 2 or 3 “gender-fluid” kids. And the result is that 14-year-gilrs should go to the same bathroom as 18-year-old boys. Obviously, I don’t want this for my child. It’s a horrible idea. Taxpayer money was spent on this crap and as a result I will have to keep paying for a private school. And that’s after paying very high property taxes that keep the public school in business.

                In my family, we don’t abort. It’s a weird, quaint tradition that we have. But we do pee. And we prefer to do it without men lurking around. We are strange that way.

                Liked by 1 person

          4. Old Reader

            You have a much bigger problem than phoney felony charges. As a group, men tend to measure everything. Sometime between the 2020 and 2024 elections, apparently some 20,000,000 votes somehow mysteriously vanished.

            You twits (please feel free to alter the vowel where appropriate) have some ‘splaining to do šŸ˜€

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

              2. I, for one, am not convinced by the case that the prosecution brought. I looked into it. It was not convincing. Flimsy, poorly argued. Apparently, most voters agree with me.

                Liked by 1 person

              3. Clarissa, it doesn’t matter what we “agree” with. There are thousands of convictions every year that I disagree with: drug offenses, prostitution, tax irregularities, etc. But what does it matter what I think? Or what you think. Or what “Americans” think? The felon is a felon. Since when have we decided that felonies are subject to our “agreement” with it? In many states, felons can’t vote, or access particular state privileges. Are they any less worthy of de-stigmatization because they haven’t run for president? Do principles no longer matter? So much for partisan blindness you pretend to decy here every day.

                Like

    2. Matt Walsh is known for being a comedian. He was making a joke.

      As for Project 2025, I haven’t read the book but all I heard about it is good stuff. I keep asking what people specifically don’t like about it but nobody seems to have read it.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  8. Also, thank you Clarissa for providing me with a valuable outlet for my Id-posting. This election season was an emotional roller-coaster, and I would’ve had a rough time were it not for this blog.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    2. Ditto on that.

      I know I’m annoyingly harping on about the agriculture picks, but I am overwhelmed with excitement and joy and I have now run out of people to burble at about it.

      I can’t WAIT to see what the rest of the cabinet looks like!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    1. It’ll be interesting to see how the various factions re-congeal in the aftermath. A large portion of the left that I respected– the antiwar, anticorporation, the oldschool environmentalists who remembered there’s more to nature than “climate change” (I hate hate hate how that single phrase suddenly erased every other ecological concern: we no longer care about pollutants, about ecosystem health, about wildlife, about desertification, about groundwater recharge… nothing! It’s all been swept away by this monomaniacal focus on the vague, undefinable ‘climate change’ which must be solved by global governments, and there’s no point in all the local actions such as cleaning up waterways, planting trees, wetlands restoration, beaver habitat…), the people who were actually concerned about labor conditions instead of just labor replacement… I think those people are still out there. They didn’t get vaporized. Some of them have defected to the Republican side– notably Gabbard and Kennedy, but I expect there are a lot of not-famous who followed them.

      Will they become a permanent part of the new right-coalition, the way the drug companies have become a part of the left now?

      I’m so curious to see how this one shuffles out in the end. I think the old left-right designations are becoming unrecognizable, and maybe need new names.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. I’m so with you on environmentalism. I was always massively for conservation, against pollution, for preserving wildlife, national parks, all that. But it was all ditched because “global warming”, which somehow means we don’t have to do anything except pour soup on paintings. And the simple yet crucial idea of picking up trash after yourself is disregarded. All those people who lecture us about climate change, what are they actually doing to preserve nature? Nothing because they get their moral superiority from climate change and that’s enough for them.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. “Global warming” was a massive con-job that hoovered up all the resources that were going to real environmental efforts, and redistributed them to NGOs that only exist as employment programs for the offspring of the idle rich.

          I’m old enough to still have before/after memories to reference for the massive anti-litter, anti-pollution campaigns, and what a magnificent and wonderful difference they made to ordinary public spaces, waterways, bayshores… and there’s still so much more that could be accomplished. Tangible goals. But no, we’ve instead diverted massive, massive amounts of money to this deliberately squishy project with no actual achievable goals. F**k that.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

      2. Methylethyl

        “Will they become a permanent part of the new right-coalition…”

        Almost certainly, there is a sense of loss, of betrayal, when grifters mislead something that is important to us. It sickens me to see governments suckered into subsidizing destructive scams like windmills, while legislating and regulating against necessary energy development.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  10. Am I the only person who finds men voting in favor of their killing their grandchildren absolutely disgusting? Men who are passionate about abortions are so fucking creepy.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Very creepy. That ad was very disturbing. Is the man trying to say he’s sad the girl wasn’t aborted?

      I don’t think people fully realize what it all looks like. That wife lying to her husband about how she voted. This creepy father. These are not normal human relationships.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

            1. Susie? She’s the one who got you DeSantis. She ran his governor campaign in 2018. And this year she ran Trump’s campaign, which was crazy effective, as we’ve seen. A powerhouse of a woman.

              Brilliant choice. It’s really a different Trump we are seeing.

              Like

              Reply

              2. …and knowing what DeSantis’ on-camera personality is like, if she’s the one responsible for his campaign, she must be an effing PR genius, and whatever that job pays, she probably deserves more.

                Liked by 1 person

        3. Yes please! The doctors and whoever else was responsible for this should absolutely be in jail. He has such a huge political mandate this time around. Time to purge all the filth from our institutions. Let’s start with Mayorkas and people at DHS/USCIS.

          People like this:

          The only reason to make a board member of an organization called Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society the head of the fucking DHS is to have open borders.

          https://hias.org/statements/hias-congratulates-board-member-alejandro-mayorkas-dhs-nomination/

          HIAS congratulates Board Member Alejandro Mayorkas on being named by President-Elect Joe Biden to be the new secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. If confirmed, Mayorkas would be the first Latino to head the department that implements and manages U.S. immigration policies.

          Just lol.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

            1. It doesn’t even need to end up with a conviction. Let’s just pursue lawfare against him and Fauci the way dems have done to their enemies in the last 4 years. File case after case in various jurisdictions. Bleed them dry financially and emotionally. Make their life hell.

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

Leave a reply to methylethyl Cancel reply