How the actual fuck do you think I’m the one that needs anything explained?
Every single comment you’ve been wrong…
I’m sorry, I can’t deal with this shit, like I said, it’s too frustrating and waaaaay too depressing.
I hope someone with more patience helps, if not, Reading Rainbow is still effective, and that way personality won’t negatively effect how long a helper hangs out with you.
It’s because we gave the money to babies so the old people didn’t get p‑‑‑ed,” Cruz said.
Literally the entire point the entire conversation of “trump accounts” is they were started at birth…
She is not contributing regularly to it before she is 14, her parents are
Rather than invest in your own retirement (because you know it won’t happen) they want parents to start in eatment accounts for their children at birth and save for their retirement.
How the fuck can people both not remember this from previous news and not be able to figure it out from the context? One or the other should work for anyone, hell everyone should be able to do both, this is not difficult.
I keep hearing about the literacy crisis, is this that?
Quick edit:
Like, not just that you misunderstood it, but that presumably at least 5 other people did…
I legitimately thought just quoting the context would make it obvious, but seemingly no one got it because I didn’t explicitly type it out …
It’s just fucking depressing man
You might not be right, but you’re confident, which is something…
How did we get it done this time? It’s because we gave the money to babies so the old people didn’t get p‑‑‑ed,” Cruz said.
"But babies grow up,” he pointed out.
“That little girl who is born this year, she’s going to be 70, and the math is if you contribute regularly to it, by the time she’s 18, she’ll have $170,000 in that account. By the time she’s 35, she’ll have $700,000 in that account,” Cruz added.
Fair warning, with a tone like that I almost didn’t bother helping you.
I legitimately didn’t read the article first tho, because I’ve heard about this months ago and remember things.
They’re just desperate to keep people investing into the system.
They want steady, never ending capital injection into the market, people paying zero attention and just using an index.
That makes it easy for them to grift with insider trading.
If only the wealthy bought stocks, who would they make money off of?
Either you made a lot of typos, or you think 14+4=70…
Even then, these “investment accounts” are supposed to start at birth, so even if your math was right, still wildly off.
Like, it’s still a grift, but I have no idea where you got those numbers
, it doesn’t matter if your minutia of info is correct on technicality, because that’s not how people perceive the DNC and the relationships between the party heads…
Hold up…
Did you really just say I’m acting like Alex Jones…
And then in the very next sentence say “facts don’t matter cuz feelings?”
but also, you look crazy, and that’s the only thing most people are going to take away listening to you.
I give zero fucks how people perceive me, you wouldn’t believe me if I told you why.
But…
The important thing here is you stopped arguing that Schumer is the DNC.
If you’re on board with that, and that the sole person who is in charge of the DNC was out there defending Plattner 7 months ago, like that link way back when…
Then we’re good here right?
You can think I look crazy, but if it worked it worked
And you can start explaining this to others, maybe in a less crazy way. But hey man, whatever works. The only thing that matters is people vote in the Dem primaries, pull em as far left as you can. Even if you do it to spite Schumer, that’s 100% cool with me, fuck that guy.
the figureheads of the democrat party, the Senate Minority Leader Schumer
Oh ok.
See, the problem was if Dem politicians didn’t vote for neoliberals for leadership, the neoliberal DNC would cutoff funding to the whole state, handing a bunch of seats to Republicans.
They were fine with this, because their goal was to never have enough power to actually do what Dem voters want.
Congress votes for their leaders in the end of January.
DNC voting members vote for chair (when a Dem wins they appoint one) in the beginning of February.
So when Schumer and Jeffries had their elections for leadership, they had the full weight of an entirely biased DNC chair who was appointed by Biden, the threats were real.
Then a few days later, the DNC voting members pivoted from neoliberals, and started dumping all that hoarded VF money on the state parties.
Schumer and Jeffries have been lame ducks this entire congress, and they will continue to do so.
They will also intentionally act like jackasses and that they are the party, because they want to depress turnout so they can get Newsom or Harris in, and they can appoint a neoliberal chair again.
Like…
Does any of that make sense?
“The DNC” is the chair. When Schumer acts like he’s “The DNC” it’s so people like you will do what you’re doing and depress dem primary turnout…
Surely, you have to realize billionaires are willing to lie and do fucked up shit to hold onto their hoarded wealth, right?
that after the DNC pick lost (horribly) to Platner,
What?
Who was “the DNC pick”?
And why did the DNC chair of all people work against “the dnc pick”?
The DNC chair explicitly saying people who wanted Plattner for the general to vote for him in the primary. And that past mistakes are something someone can overcome…
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5562531-platner-resurfaced-comments-dnc-chair/
Like, what logical steps are you skipping here?
You’re saying the literal opposite of reality right now, that’s the most the DNC has (and likely will) say about a primary challenger.
Martin would have broken the biasy regulations he implemented if he endorsed him any harder…
Did you even know those were implemented?
Like, everything you’re complaining about was fixed over a year ago, but you use “dnc” like trump uses “antifa”…
You clearly don’t know what the organization is or how its structured, you just know billionaire owned media agrees with you…
Don’t listen to billionaires, none of them are on our side and all do them are pissed they don’t control both parties anymore.
Why the fuck do you think they’re focusing on DNC instead of the literal fascist government?
If you have a source of him saying he’d release it to the public, I’d love to see it. But honestly if I can’t find it, and none.of the many, many, people repeating that claim have been able to find it…
That’s what I asked for…
You haven’t provided it, I have moved zero goalposts, I think you’re just confused.
I’m willing to help now that you’re not using explicit insults tho.
Like, if I said I wanted proof that Larry Bird said humans evolved from giraffes, would you take someone word when they told you? Or would you want to hear exactly what Larry Bird said direct from the giraffes mouth?
This is larger than the current topic, if you don’t understand this, you’re gonna constantly be falling for propaganda.
If you don’t want any help, or think i can’t help you, all you have to do is not reply anymore.
But I can put up with some low grade verbal abuse if it helps defeat fascism, it’s better than the alternative
No…
That was a journalist employed by a billionaire media corporation saying it…
If he said it, don’t you think the quote of him saying it would be all over the place?
Seriously, what’s your logic for why no one can provide an actual source of him saying it?
Why isn’t billionaire owned media playing that clip 24/7?
You don’t think it’s possible that billionaires are lying to you?
Why do you blindly trust oligarchs so much? That’s a wild take on Lemmy…
Good to see the people are finally catching up with the new DNC…
Martin said Sunday that he believes “in second chances” and that “a lot of people say things at their most vulnerable times.”
"The question for me is whether or not they actually learn from them, whether or not they actually reflect on those, that they’re sincere in their apology and more importantly that they have changed their behavior,” the first-year DNC chair added.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5562531-platner-resurfaced-comments-dnc-chair/
Only seven months behind.
But again, he’s not gonna endorse anyone in a primary, because the dnc should never pick favorites in any primary:
Martin, though, said the DNC will not “put the thumb on the scale for anyone,” despite the public’s concerns over candidates’ ages.
"It’s up to the primary voters in all these states to decide who they think will be the best candidate to represent us as we take on Republicans in each of those states,” Martin added. “My job as a DNC chair is to build the infrastructure we need to win.”
Like, his defense of Plattner 7 months ago was the most we’ll see the DNC get involved in a primary, and even that was “if voters want him, voters want him”.
It’s like people don’t realize it took 30 years to get here…
The quote from the author of the article:
In brief remarks to the press after his election, Martin committed to publicly releasing a post-mortem of the 2024 campaign, which the DNC did not do after the 2016 election. Martin did not say how quickly the committee would execute the review.
That does claim he said publicly…
But look at the quote to support it:
"There has to be some lessons that we glean on that so we can operationalize it, not just here in DC, but through all of the 57 state parties,” Martin said. “We’ve got to look backwards and look forward at the same time.”
What about that says “we’ll publicly release it”?
Why do you think that was the closest quote a billionaire owned media corporation could find?
How is it neoliberal propaganda to expect a public postmortem?
Because it’s literally never been publicly released before…
Because Martin said he’d release it internally at the DNC, like every other post election…
Why would its release be damaging?
I honestly think it should be released, but the damaging aspect is it’s about Joe Biden’s choosen chair did to try and for e Biden and Kamala on us.
The DNC chair is a dictatorship, acting like the new one is responsible for the old one is as dumb as blaming a hypothetical Dem president in 2029 for what trump is doing in 2026…
What evidence is there that neolibs don’t control the DNC anymore?
That the voting members picked the chair of Minnesota who spent a decade running fair primaries and turned it from purple to one of the most progressive states in the country… Simply by not fighting progressives.
That he’s been dumping the VF money on state parties for over a year, and a neoliberal.would never do that because they want to save it all for the presidential…
Shumer is still minority leader.
Because that vote was two weeks before the DNC chair, so at the time the neoliberal threat of bankrupting a state party for not voting Schumer/Jeffries was valid, neoliberals had done it before and will do it again if they regain the DNC.
Most Dems are still backed by AIPAC…
They were protected by a biased DNC, they no longer are. Go work on primary campaigns against them, but youre running out of time for this cycle. But being “non biased” means the DNC isn’t kicking out shitty neoliberals, that’s literally what primaries are for…
What meaningful change has occurred?
…
You do keep hearing about Dems “over performing”, right?
That’s because state parties have the funds the neoliberals were hoarding.
Like, the problem here is you want a DNC that’s biased for us. And Martin wants a DNC that does what it’s supposed to, which honestly isn’t really anything. The Dem party should be structured from bottom-up, and Martin is giving that “power” back to the state parties.
The big change isn’t that we get a progressive bias, the big change is no one is holding them down anymore.
That’s all it takes, and if a Dem wins in 2028, then they name the next DNC chair.
So if you don’t like Martin, support the furtherest left candidate in the Dem primary, and hope they appoint an explicitly progressing chair.
We just completed a step that took 30 fucking years, we can wait another 2.
All depressing turnout in Dem primaries does, is help neoliberal like Kamala or Newsom. If they name a chair we’re fucked.
Edit:
Almost forgot, he codified DNC regulations preventing anyone from endorsing or getting involved in down ballot primaries…
Which, if you’ve paid attention the last 30 years or so, has been the main problem people have had with the DNC.
The correction isnt “biased, but for us” because that still wouldn’t be unbiased
Ken Martin said it would be public
Billionaire owned media definitely keeps saying it…
The only sources I’ve ever seen, is Martin saying it will be released to “DNC members”…
I’ve noticed a lot of people took that to mean “the public” but that’s only because they don’t understand what “DNC member” is…
There’s only like 400 voting members, and I think the non-voting members are less than that?
If you have a source of him saying he’d release it to the public, I’d love to see it. But honestly if I can’t find it, and none.of the many, many, people repeating that claim have been able to find it…
I gotta say, not holding my breath
Everyone trying to act like this is a public document that the DNC is hiding is trying to sabotage the DNC because neoliberals don’t control it anymore, or have fallen hook line and sinker for propaganda.
Martin said he give it to DNC members, that’s not voters. That s literally the ~400 voting members of the DNC.
And I’m pretty sure he did do that…
Because no one from the DNC is complaining they can’t see it.
The people complaining they can’t see it, are the neoliberals that don’t run the DNC (who still likely have it) and billionaire owned media (who have also likely seen a copy)
They just want to get people to abstain in the next presidential primary so a neoliberal like Newspm can sneak in.
It’s blatant manipulation, why can’t everyone see this?
That’s one of the biggest advantages…
Literally today he was bragging about a bunch of incumbents losing their primaries to radical maga candidates in Indiana…
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/indiana-state-senate-results
Those were are very tight but low turnout races…
trump isn’t enough to motivate Republicans anymore, and when he does, it’s damn near 50/50 for him or against him.
He’ll make midterms about himself, and it’s going to backfire.
I saw something about how Putin may have been holed up in a bunker for a while, and that is probably playing into this a lot.
trump has always looked up to him and wanted to emulate him. Even before Putin retreated to a bunker, I’m sure it came up as often as they talk.
trump hear Putin talk about a super bunker (likely not as good as trump already had) so he bulldozed his to make a better one than Putin.
Not sure on the timeline, but as Putin did less bragging about how fancy it was and more about it’s serious uses, and eventually retreated to it…
trump likely sees how important any bunker is, and now the one 20 feet away isn’t useable.
They 100% have more, Biltmore (pretty sure) is the most famous decommissioned one. It was built under a Bezos-level mansion so it’s construction could be hid, which brings it back to the ballroom.
It’s just hard to write shit off as coincidence these days
The purge of establishment Republicans who are just as evil but know how to work the system continues…
They’ll get replaced by empty suits just there for the grift, or useful idiots. Either way, they’re more likely to turn on trump when his back is finally against the wall. And more likely to lose general elections than the incumbents.
Fucking with these primaries all over the country will add up. Not just in federal goverment, but pulling a lot of “safe” red states back into competition. And trump needs red state governments if he’s going to try and rig/cancel the presidential election.
MAGA that’s becoming disillusioned would have still turned out in a general for who they stupidly believe has been helping, but if they’re turned off trump, they may not turn out to vote for his picks that just kicked “their guys” out of office when they were happy (again, due to stupidity) with who they had
Yeah, it’s a long progress and will take a couple cycles.
The only way we fuck it up is if a neoliberal wins the presidential primary due to depressed turnout.
If that happens, they’ll likely still win the general,but then they’ll hand the party to a neoliberal who will go back to fixing primaries.
That’s why there’s already a big push against the DNC by billionaire owned media.
Like, imagine the type of DNC chair someone like AOC would nominate (officially there’s a performative vote).
The way to get that tho, is getting someone like AOC thru the Dem primary, not around it.
Ironically enough, it’s the plan for actual Marxist-Lenism
Marxism–Leninism holds that a two-stage communist revolution is needed to replace capitalism. A vanguard party, organized through democratic centralism, would seize power on behalf of the proletariat and establish a one-party communist state. The state would control the means of production, suppress opposition, counter-revolution, and the bourgeoisie, and promote Soviet collectivism, to pave the way for an eventual communist society that would be classless and stateless.[12]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism–Leninism
We just have to make sure we don’t hand the keys to the bus to someone like Stalin at that point in the game…
I 100% get not committing to run right now, it would be stupid to do so.
But I sure as fuck hope she realizes becoming president is our best shot at that.
Shed drive down ballot races like Obama did, but isn’t as cocky and obsessed with personal power to ignore the DNC after winning like Obama did. Shed name a progressive chair.
Bringing in a wave of progressives and putting the party firmly on the progressive side of the divide is absolutely the biggest thing she (or anyone) can do to get us single payer healthcare.
So like I said, hopefully she’s planning to run, just smart enough to not say it yet.