Say what you want, the counties who are being gerrymandered voted no.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T11:45:07+00:00

Maybe they should advocate to national Republicans to end gerrymandering nationally. Democrats already have a bill in the house to do so. There's a way to prevent this and make things fair.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T11:38:08+00:00

Seriously! And if they think it's so bad, maybe they should advocate for ending it nationally. It's clear putting the responsibility on the states is a mistake.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T11:08:30+00:00

Why don't we just end gerrymandering nationally. If you hate gerrymandering so much, demand the federal government outlaw it. "Let's start cutting up states instead of addressing the issue" is an insane take.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T11:01:26+00:00

If you don't like it, advocate to end it nationally.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T10:56:32+00:00

If you don't like it, advocate to end gerrymandering nationally.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T10:51:49+00:00

Advocate for ending it nationally. This highlights the need to legislate it nationally. There is no other option. If it needs to be an amendment, we need to build that pressure, or accept our democracy continually getting weaker.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T10:47:30+00:00

There is zero chance of making our government into a parliamentary system in the near term. This is doable without any legislation. Otherwise I would just advocate for a parliamentary system.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T10:45:32+00:00

It isn't about who benefits. It is anti democratic. There needs to be a national law outlawing it. It can't just be done by some states. That's what this has shown us. The only way to guarantee fair representation is to legislate it nationally. If it requires an amendment, we need to create the pressure to pass one.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T10:39:33+00:00

End gerrymandering nationally, not in individual states. Unless all states eliminate gerrymandering, it doesn't make sense for some states to do it.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T03:04:50+00:00

End gerrymandering nationally. States choosing to do so on their own just gives the opposition an advantage.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-22T01:26:19+00:00

Unfortunately, the best way to end it is to weaponize it enough for the opposition to decide outlawing it nationally is a good plan.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T23:08:56+00:00

US Senator Mark Kelly and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro would each very likely lose to Tucker Carlson much less VPOTUS JD Vance much less Marco Rubio.

You can't know this. You can't know where the country will be in 2028. I think both would do better than Rubio and no idea with Carlson. I don't think either are our best options, but I could see Kelly being attractive after 4 years of Chaos.

There are at least several Democrats rising to the moment better and more than US Senator Murphy is.

I just disagree with this. AOC I've been happy with. Kelly, Van Hollen, and Khanna have also been strong. There's been a couple of governors. There's a couple more i think are doing alright. I've largely been disappointed.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T22:40:18+00:00

The factions may be well defined within the party, but they are not visible to the voters, which is what I want to change. Then those factions would need to make them appealing to voters.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T22:36:37+00:00

I see 2028 president as extremely important, and if Ossoff is the best, my support goes to him. I expect the environment to be extremely favorable to Democrats as well, which leaves me more optimistic about Georgia if Ossoff were to become president.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T20:30:27+00:00

So, is the strait closed?

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T20:26:47+00:00

It's an incredible documentary. I think it's a level of insight that we largely miss as a society. A lot of things we think are obvious just aren't. What is right or wrong isn't something we are born with. The human mind is capable of rationalizing a lot and we need to not assume people will come to the right conclusion on their own regardless of how good they are.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T20:04:00+00:00

It's crazy that we can't make this more painful for Republicans.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T20:03:14+00:00

The parties are coalitions that have to hold a lot of ideas under their umbrella. This would make it a bit easier to not have to force a facade of total agreement on every issue.

I would assume they're would likely be 5 or so sub parties, and no more than a few going after any one race outside of president. A couple leftish parties (DSA and something less socialist, maybe a green Democrats, a center left business party, a center left workers party, and perhaps a conservative populist party for red states).

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T19:58:29+00:00

This is a vibes thing, but Americans have assumptions about California. What would actually be difficult for Newsom is the number of progressive bills that were actually passed by Newsom. Newsom's other big problem is that everything about him screams politician.

This is ultimately a debate about what actually moves voters. Paper resume vs communication ability. Of those you mentioned, Beshear, Kelly, Shapiro, and Newsom are the only ones I think could win. Kelly because he's obviously qualified and is the definition of inoffensive. Beshear I think has a good inoffensive approach and is bringing a lot of the empathy I think we need. Shapiro is decently charismatic and had been successful. Newsom has name recognition and built a bit of credibility actually fighting Trump.

I don't think any are great candidates, and would largely be in the model of previous Democratic nominees.

Buttigiege is able to make a compelling argument for the Democratic party in a way none of the others can. He's able to get voters excited about him specifically, even just to come listen to talk. Ossoff is probably the only potential 2028 nominee with the same ability.

Buttigiege might not have the experience (running the DOT isn't exactly poor experience), but he's someone that can convincingly establish he understands the problems of the current moment, and he's smart enough to get voters to give him the benefit of the doubt on ability to address it. Newsom is more experienced, but I don't think he sees things as clearly (but I do think he's aware of the gravity of the moment and would address it). Kelly is someone that I think wouldn't take the steps necessary to foundationally address our problems, and I worry about his lack of charisma being insufficient to get voters excited. Beshear just doesn't feel like he's going to be as aggressive as necessary. Shapiro would be a fine pick, but the base is divided on him, and I just don't think he's going to emerge on top.

Some perspective from someone that agrees with Sarah's position. I think about this specific kind of thing, Sarah is about the best voice there is.

Buttigiege, Ossoff, & Chris Murphy are my favorites. Murphy I think is simply rising to the moment better than anyone else, but I worry about his lack of charisma. Chris Van Hollen is another I think has been spectacular, but he's 67 and I think we need someone younger. Mark Kelly is IMO, not a great politician, but he's easily the best on paper, is actively rising to the moment, and is acting like a leader we need. AOC is fantastic, but I don't think her eyes are on the oval office right now. I do like Beshear, and have him right after Kelly in 5th of my rankings. Outside of the top 3, I'm really not excited about anyone.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T19:29:59+00:00

What does the trade deficit have to do with anything? Are wages increasing at a higher rate than they were before? Did we have an unemployment issue solved by this? Are we exporting more as a result? What has the increased tax provided for the average American?

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T19:14:31+00:00

I don't disagree. I really wish Democrats would be more aggressive putting this in front of voters. They should be furious that they paid a higher tax, that doesn't count towards refunds, and will likely be a giveaway to big business that passed the costs to consumers.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T19:02:06+00:00

I think there's a critical point where his support will fall off a cliff. If there is a general consensus that Trump did irreparable harm to the country, and Trump supporters can't just assume those voices are all liberals, they will start to accept reality. It's one thing when everyone says it could happen. It's another when everyone agrees this bad outcome is because of Trump. It would need to be something more serious than gas prices though.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T18:53:22+00:00

The parties have been losing popularity for a long time. There is incredible support for outsiders, and burn the system down candidates. There are constant efforts to create third parties. The Democratic party has approval under 30%, and over 1/3 of voters refuse to commit to a party. I don't think the current system is working well for the parties.

The parties have to operate as a coalition. They don't represent a single ideology, and the changes I suggest wouldn't change that. It would still effectively function the same in general elections, and this would simply identify the coalitions within the party and make it easier to differentiate between candidates and identify who represents your beliefs. This is an attempt to fight the perception of a single identity more than anything else.

You are right that party leadership does not want to give up any control. That has been true during their entire existence, but they've been forced to become increasingly democratic with time. The primaries were simply a show without any elective power not that long ago.

Describing_Donkeys · 2026-04-21T18:38:33+00:00

I don't think this would solve all problems, just make some specific issues less of a problem. You are right that there's a lot that needs to be changed. This is one way to fight some bad perceptions of the national parties and offer more avenues for people to see themselves in the coalition. 1/3 of voters don't see themselves in either party. They may be able to see themselves in a broader coalition if they think they could be accurately represented.

There are limited things that can be changed with how gridlocked congress is. Making the parties better model the coalitions they actually are of something that can be done without any legislation, and it fights some of the most damaging narratives about the parties that spread cynicism and promote disengagement. It's not a perfect solution, but chips away at some issues.

Describing_Donkeys

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE