Chalk up another win for Trump.

Special Counsel Jack Smith moves to drop Trump election interference case

"Special Counsel Jack Smith on Friday filed a motion to vacate all deadlines in the 2020 election interference case against President-elect Trump in Washington, D.C., a widely expected move, but one that stops short of dropping the case against him completely."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/special-counsel-jack-smith-moves-drop-trump-election-interference-case

True.  

And an L for the rule of law. 

I don't know. Democrats do often have the better policies for the working class. In theory that should be a starting off point that made it basically impossible for the Republicans. The problems is, that the left or more specifically the richer, educated left living in coastal cities for years distance themself from the working class men. They basically say: we don't want you and we don't need you. That is not specifically for the democrats as a party (which indeed has very different people), but people with a high reach: liberal media and left internet influencers.  So yeah, I think this messaging has to change. And not like "You men are stupid and vote against your own interest!", but something like "Hey, look what we do for the working class and what we intend to do going forward." And yes, the right is very good in hogging the spotlight with crazy shit. And yes, it is unfair the shit they get away with. Do you want to cry about it or win?

But what do I know.

Looking back I think what killed democrats' chances was Joe Manchin & Kyrsten Sinema preventing democrats from enacting popular legislation early on. Those 2 abused the fact Dems had a very narrow majority in the Senate and made the Democrats into the "do-nothings democrats" Trump was claiming earlier, both making Democrats unpopular and giving credibility back to Trump and Republicans after January 6. 

Joe Machin especially was claiming "We can't do away with filibuster because if we do then Republicans will also do it". yeah right -_- like anybody is believing Republicans will take the high road and work with a filibuster in place. They'll remove at first opportunities.

Sanders: [It] "should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them."

Yep. That's it. For years the left as a movement (not the democratic party alone) has messaged they don't want and don't need the working class. Even though democrats have consistently the better policies for working class people, but they seem to be ashamed about it.

What is happening that the wealthier, well educated left is hyperfocusing on identity politics (and the right is gladly playing their game as they realize it is beneficial to them). But the real conflict in the world is a class conflict. White and black people, gay and straight are all exploited as workers by Amazon and Walmart and so on. The educated left keeps separating people into smaller and smaller compartments and explains they are at odds, while the workers don't care which skin color their coworker has, they care about both getting paid better and more vacation days. Focus on that.

Musk retweeted a sum up of the last few days. I'm feeling increasingly confident about this Givernment now that we are out of the media cycle spreading fear running up to the election. Let's see how he handles women's rights and obortion laws, I fully expect him to fight for pro choice. 

"Misogyny" isn't a binary thing. It's not you're sexist or you're not sexist.

Attacking "ugly women" as if their value is from their appearance is sexist; promoting "attractive women" because they're attractive is also sexist.

"Misogyny" doesn't mean you want to torture all women or something like that.

Trump has a history of degrading women based on their appearance, and treating them like sex objects. Installing a competent woman into the White House doesn't make him not a misogynist. 

A slave owner treating one of his 20 slaves "relatively well", doesn't negate his treatment of the other 19. 

And the constant problem with conservative rhetoric is that people that are in the in-group tend to be treated well, and people that aren't, tend to be treated poorly. Conservative women get treated relatively well, and liberal women get called pink haired freaks that no one wants to have sex with.

Look, you even brought an excellent example at the end of this video:

This is a discussion that even happens in left wing circles. If there's some inherent biological advantage, and how much of it is taken away by transitioning.

I think the real issue here though is that there are so few trans people in sports, that it feels misleading for anyone to run on.

Like bestiality is probably well over a 1000x more common than trans people in sports. And that's something that can be dangerous for people or the animal. And yet I've never seen a congress person run on that topic. 

Great examples of misogyny Eric!

There were several years between when she became prosecutor. She became one in 1990, and started dating Willie in 1994. 

And no, she didn't ruin his marriage. His wife separated in 1982. 

And also no, she said she wouldn't trust the vaccine based on Trump's word, if competent research was done, she would trust that research. 

That is how that should work. If Joe Biden said "this new vaccine is super good", I wouldn't trust it. If 14 pieces of research were done about the new vaccine across the world and showed that it was extremely effective and safe, that's different.  

You are right, but I usually don't care as I don't care about competitive sports to begin with. But yeah it is true and for people that are having difficulties to admit that: there are also sports in which competitors are separated by weight class. That's why at the start of a boxing event the contestant have to be weighed. People should ask themself, why this is happening and the answer is: otherwise it would be an unfair competition. Same with separating by gender. Allowing Transwomen is also unfair. So I don't know what trans athletes should do, maybe a transwomen and transmen category? People should consider that nobody is talking about transmen, and for good reason: transmen that have to compete with men cannot compete. Basically the reason why letting transwomen compete with women is unfair to women is the same reason why letting transmen compete with men is unfair to transmen. So putting up extra categories for transpeople seems to me currently the best option, but again: I am not into competitive sports.

But the more interesting part here is: Republicans blast ads about this issue? Everyone should ask themself why they do that. And the answer is: this issues puts the current educated left in an argumentative disadvantage because they willfully handicapped themself by not allowing themself to talk honest about it (like you did). This forum is very mixed politically, therefore you get away with saying that, on a more leftist forum you would get roasted for saying: "The problem with transwomen in women's sports is that you are effectively discriminating against women." Not because you are wrong, but because some people seem to think speaking honestly about true things is somehow discrimination.

A few posts above yours someone posted the reaction of Bernie Sanders and Seth Moulton. And apparently Moulton also adressed trans issues, and the article says: "also repeated comments about trans athletes he had earlier made in the New York Times that leaders in Salem and across Massachusetts have called harmful." So talking about trans in this way is considered harmful. So why are Republicans blasting these ads? Because Democrats either keep their mouth shut or start arguing between themself if they react on it. It is impossible for them to deal with this.

But there is a second reason: People - especially sports fans - may somewhat be invested in that question, but usually at election other issues are more pressing. Republicans effectively distract from all the stuff they don't look as good. See, Democrats would have also an easy in: just show an statistic how wealth among the TOP 1% and the lower 50% (or even 90%) developed over the last years and then show Trump being buddy-buddy with super rich starting with Musk. And asking: "Who will he make policies for?" That should be helpful.

Well then every man and women is a misogynist based on that criteria.