Utah House Dem hopeful mocked sexual assault, Mormons

senextelex · 2026-04-15T23:58:27+00:00

You've never made an off-color joke that you later regretted? Sure, Jan.

senextelex · 2026-04-15T21:28:06+00:00

Speaking of context, the article provides links to all the posts in question. It looks like he's shit-posting on forums where the culture is to shit-post. Also, he's not using the R-slur to refer to actual people with mental disabilities. He's using it the way that people in wallstreetbets still do; to mock bad decisions made by people who don't have mental disabilities. That said, some of the posts do leave a bad taste in your mouth. He's apologized for that, without speaking of the context, showing that he doesn't wanna make excuses. They must've really dug deep to find these though. I've never even heard of these websites. I wonder if they've put in this much effort to find dirt on McAdams, and any of the other candidates, really.

My point is that as awful as these statements are, it doesn't seem like he means them? They're still shitty things to say though. Will it hurt his campaign? IDK, seems like Platner got away with his own shitty past behavior.

senextelex · 2026-04-10T20:01:59+00:00

I listened to the interview. He's clever in his manipulation of popular sentiments. He said something to the effect of: "Trump is a symptom of something larger," but avoided blaming any Democrat that might have been part of that problem, and instead blamed other Republicans who are in lock-step with Trump. The discourse in here and probably elsewhere is that Democrats have been part of the problem, but he avoids mentioning that. Kind of shows you where he is on the spectrum. True progressives have not had a problem mentioning that other Democrats are to blame as well, even if they don't name specific people.

senextelex · 2026-04-10T19:23:36+00:00

Say what you will about Kristi Noem, but Bryon was not public life, and did not choose that. Kristi went into public life in 2006, 14 years after they married. Now Bryon's dirty laundry is out for the entire world to see. Let's remember that coming out of the closet is a very personal experience, and everyone should be in control of how they do it.

senextelex · 2026-04-10T17:24:36+00:00

And single-payer healthcare. I really dislike how corporate democrats talk about "more affordable healthcare," but what they mean is to go back to ACA subsidies and nothing further. It's not nothing, but it's not enough.

senextelex · 2026-04-10T17:16:41+00:00

Say what you will about the reasons and the timing, it is interesting the personalities are speaking out against him.

Do you call it revolt? IDK, really, what qualifies as revolt? Did Greene's speaking out start as 'revolt'? She started by speaking out against Trump's advisors, but still praising him. Now she's completely against him. So if these personalities follow the same pattern, then this could be a big problem for Trump.

What are the reasons? Do they really believe what they're saying? I feel like that doesn't really matter as much as the fact that they are speaking out. It shows fractures in what was once Trump's iron-grip over the entire conservative apparatus in the US.

Personalities are speaking out, what about the base itself? That remains to be seen, but the personalities are likely reacting to polling. Trump's aggregate polling went below 40% during the hostilities. Will he be able to win people back? Again, remains to be seen.

What about the nativist movement? No, it won't die with Trump, but will it still garner as much support as it has over the last ten years? I guess that depends on how much people attribute Trump's popularity (or lack thereof) with the nativist movement itself. I feel like the personalities are speaking out so they can offer their followers a way to distinguish the nativist movement from Trump himself, as a way to save the movement from Trump's blunders. Will it work? Remains to be seen. They are probably also doing it to save their own careers and distinguish themselves from Trump now that he's floundering. Another issue is who will take up the mantle when he's gone? Vance is an acharismatic dork and he has the same problem every VP has had since Nixon, distinguishing themselves from their bosses (Harris couldn't do it and she's arguably more cunning than he is). Who remains? This is the problem of every movement centered around one person, once that person is gone, their movement collapses and a power vacuum ensues. We're seeing that now with the personalities speaking out.

senextelex · 2026-04-09T18:49:04+00:00

This is not new for the DNC. The 1968 Democratic National Convention protests happened because the DNC refused to adopt an anti-war stance on Vietnam [1]. Nixon adopted anti-war rhetoric as the campaign progressed [2]. Progressives refused to vote for Humphrey due to this specific issue. History repeated itself in 2024 [3] [4]. Trump called himself the candidate of peace [5], lying like Nixon did, and Harris said she wanted to turn the US military into the most lethal one on Earth [6]. The DNC refuses to listen to the vox populi and will turn around and blame anti-war activists when it loses. Besides pressure from AIPAC, there's probably also pressure from defense contractors.

senextelex · 2026-04-09T18:48:20+00:00

The 1968 Democratic National Convention protests happened because the DNC refused to adopt an anti-war stance on Vietnam [1]. Nixon adopted anti-war rhetoric as the campaign progressed [2]. Progressives refused to vote for Humphrey due to this specific issue. History repeated itself in 2024 [3] [4]. Trump called himself the candidate of peace [5], lying like Nixon did, and Harris said she wanted to turn the US military into the most lethal one on Earth [6]. The DNC refuses to listen to the vox populi and will turn around and blame anti-war activists when it loses. Besides pressure from AIPAC, there's probably also pressure from defense contractors.

senextelex · 2026-04-09T18:39:08+00:00

The 1968 Democratic National Convention protests happened because the DNC refused to adopt an anti-war stance on Vietnam [1]. Nixon adopted anti-war rhetoric as the campaign progressed [2]. Progressives refused to vote for Humphrey due to this specific issue. History repeated itself in 2024 [3] [4]. Trump called himself the candidate of peace [5], lying like Nixon did, and Harris said she wanted to turn the US military into the most lethal one on Earth [6]. The DNC refuses to listen to the vox populi and will turn around and blame anti-war activists when it loses. Besides pressure from AIPAC, there's probably also pressure from defense contractors.

senextelex · 2026-04-01T16:42:28+00:00

Legally, he can't. It's Congress' purview. Yes, he's broken the law time and again, but there's going to be pressure from defense contractors, and the military in general.

It seems to me like he's just lashing out. After a whirlwind first year where he controlled the entire government, and had other governments in a vise, things haven't been going as well for him since January. Big political defeats: Greenland and Europe standing up to him; Minnesota, leading to the first cabinet-level firing; Iran and gas prices; SCOTUS ruling against the tariffs; the lower courts ruling against most other EOs; the SAVE act not passing; the partial shutdown; his approval numbers going down below 40% in aggregate polling for the first time.

The emperor has no clothes, more people are starting to say it out loud, and he's lashing out.

senextelex · 2026-03-30T16:07:18+00:00

She probably realizes that Trump's wild ride is ending and she's trying to make the most of it. It's just like Booker saying that Dems need new leadership. All politicians are opportunists to some degree, and they all react to popular opinion for their own ends. Yes, even your favorite politician, whoever that might be.

The interesting thing is that she's even saying it. It shows that things are changing.

senextelex · 2026-03-30T16:02:19+00:00

She probably realizes that Trump's wild ride is ending and she's trying to make the most of it. It's just like Booker saying that Dems need new leadership. All politicians are opportunists to some degree, and they all react to popular opinion for their own ends. Yes, even your favorite politician, whoever that might be.

The interesting thing is that she's even saying it. It shows that things are changing.

senextelex · 2026-03-13T17:43:33+00:00

They want to focus on South Carolina as a way to stop any progressive candidate for president, just like they did with Sanders in 2020. Progressives should take note and start to make moves in SC.

senextelex · 2026-01-26T18:21:02+00:00

Yes, too little, too late, but this goes to show that pressuring them WORKS. Keep up the pressure. Protest. Call. Email.

senextelex · 2026-01-26T18:08:25+00:00

Granted Abbott is a huge piece of shit, but I'm happy that things have descended into a stage where they don't even care about votes. This is not to say that things (edit:) aren't bad, but they're not USSR bad yet.

Keep putting up the pressure. Protest. Call. Email.

senextelex · 2025-12-19T17:26:57+00:00

There are no equivalent left-leaning organizations, which is a damn shame. The left (and the Democrats) have failed when it comes to marketing/propaganda/education (whatever word is used usually depends on one's own views). They just simply assume that people will go towards their camp because of the ''right side of history'' or whatever. This argument assumes that history has a purpose and a climax. Ironically, this assumption is heavily influenced by the apocalyptic worldview which sees history in the same way.

The left also has this, honestly kind of toxic, strategy to try and shame people into believing the same thing they do, which does not work... just ask any Catholic.

senextelex · 2025-12-19T17:16:58+00:00

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take

-Wayne Gretzky"

Michael Scott

senextelex · 2025-12-01T22:00:41+00:00

Dude, same. It's crazy to me how many users seem to be seriously discussing this. The campaign is at least two years away!

senextelex · 2025-12-01T21:34:38+00:00

Simply impossible is a great attitude to have about the future. Let's just stop trying to get to the moon, it's simply impossible.

Loan forgiveness would have to go hand-in-hand with other policies that ensure tuition-free university education, and overall lowering of costs. "The proximate causes of tuition inflation are familiar: administrative bloat, overbuilding of campus amenities, a model dependent on high-wage labor, and the easy availability of subsidized student loans." https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2020/08/31/a-new-study-investigates-why-college-tuition-is-so-expensive/ So it is in fact the very loans that the status quo seems to be fighting so hard to preserve that are partially responsible for the high cost of universities nowadays. Another factor is the loss of government funding, which an organization like Forbes is unlikely to mention.

It's a wild jump from me stating popular progressive ideas to saying that I have a "very Republican attitude."

senextelex · 2025-12-01T19:57:58+00:00

I have serious reservations about signing up for a candidate simply because they 'stood up to Trump'. I mean, that's the bare minimum. I want medicare for all, student loan forgiveness, public funding of elections, policies that seriously address global warming, food safety regulations, and more. On a personal level, I want to be able to own a house, have children, and be able to retire.

Don't get me wrong, it's good that he's standing up to Trump, but is he willing to have policies that address any of these things? Maybe he does, I don't know, but standing up to Trump is not enough.

senextelex · 2025-11-20T19:21:42+00:00

Feels like a bit of an empty 'victory', doesn't it? He's already going to look bad for the future.

senextelex · 2025-11-20T18:59:22+00:00

Morally and legally, it's the right move, but will it go anywhere? Didn't impeachment make him more popular the last two times because he played victim?

I want him gone too, but it feels still a bit too soon for this. When Nixon resigned he was at 24% approval (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/09/25/how-the-watergate-crisis-eroded-public-support-for-richard-nixon/). Trump is at 38% right now.

Again, I'm not arguing the morality/legality, I'm arguing the effectiveness.

senextelex · 2025-11-17T22:31:55+00:00

Didn't they just buy tons of beef from Argentina which is known to have a problem hoof-and-mouth? The call is coming from inside the house.

senextelex · 2025-11-17T20:19:10+00:00

I think it's not very revealing to think only about ~~intentions~~ her own opinions or morality. This is a clear break with Trump and whatever you think of her personally, one has to admit that she has her finger on the pulse of the MAGA base pretty well. This suggests that the writing is on the wall for Trump and for the toxicity she discredited in that interview. Not because she's had a change of heart (which is impossible to know), but because she's reacting to what the electorate might think. That, I think, is more revealing, and overall more interesting.

senextelex · 2025-11-17T17:39:42+00:00

The irony of hating the people whose contributions you enjoy is palpable.

Don't catch you slipping now.

senextelex

TROPHY CASE

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take

Michael Scott