Lol. Maybe if your preferred marginalized group is in the majority. Tell me about the Democrat that will win running on reparations, lol.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Sure. Barack Obama. Hope and change. Totally with you. But okay take 2008 and imagine Obama had delivered more on economics, say he went full old school new deal federal jobs program. You really think he wouldn’t have still lost the House in ‘10 and the Senate in ‘14?
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Jobs program would directly affect the poor much more than any of those things you said but OK sure. Yeah I think he would have lost, probably worse, and I think 11-16 would have played out almost identically. Except he would have done more good than he actually did.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Eh. But Obama might have lost in 2012 under that scenario, and Romney, being competent, would have dismantled what he did far better than Trump could. But Clinton would have won in 16, you’re right.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @csilverandgold
I mean, Hillary would have won in 16 IF Obama won in ‘12. If Obama had lost in 12 after being SUPER PROGRESSIVE in 2008, it would have “proven” to Democrats that progressivism loses elections and HRC would have campaigned as Bill Part 2 and signed Paul Ryan’s privatization bill.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Anyway I agree with you that poor people having more electoral power is good, especially poor people of color. I just think ultimately that moves the needle 5 percentage points in a good year, and that’s not enough to stop Rs from shutting down Congress on the regular.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.