There’s ample evidence Russia has interfered in previous elections and The Daily Mail claims Epstein sold dirt on Prince Andrew to Putin. As if there’s a global crime syndicate in league with Epstein and Putin’s little friend Krasnov because we know he didn’t win *either* election.

That’s not at all what I am arguing. In fact I am not arguing. Democratic leaders stressed how safe elections were. So when they Kamala lost were they supposed to say, “Guess they aren’t safe.” ? In hindsight we say yes they should. But I can see why at the time they did not.

The category of persons who are white, well-to-do, not personally threatened will eventually wise up. I think the question is to make that happen for enough of them before it's too late. I consider this kind communication and persuasion problem a lot. I'll try to follow up here with some ideas.

? Certainly they were all very quiet very quickly. But who really knows? The more memoirs, the more obfuscation.

Who is responsible for gutting the EPA? You speak as if “we” are equally culpable along with Republicans. Not much anyone can do when voters don’t elect liberals, is there?

it is sad, & politically, too. "why don't they care about the environment more?" -- "why don't they care about the rights of women & minorities more?"--"why don't they care about saving our democracy?"

they may care about other things, but not the things you want them to.

that's the point. issues that would seem to be urgent to voters just were not, apparently. it wasn't "greatness" but desperation as the Vietnam War really meant something to young Americans & civil rights was a mission some would literally give their lives for.

it's "grandkids"-- i.e., younger voters who should have cared more about issues that will greatly affect their future, but evidently did not. Democratic leaders need to appeal to younger voters but seem to have lost the thread of their engagement.

yes, everyone thinks this; but how to define "complicity"?--- is it active, passive; what is it? a sense of defeat, perhaps a sense that defeat is unavoidable; a wish not to further upset the already divisive country; an acknowledgment that some issues (like Gaza) were not well handled, & doomed?

calling Republicans "insane & bad people" & Democrats "not insane & good people" begs the question: if being "good" means not to really care much if "not-good" people take office, by what stretch of the imagination should these people be considered "good"?

In a nutshell. Except for Newson,
Bernie, and AOC, where’s the rage, where’s the “the batbarians are at the gate” need to resist? Sure, it’s a broken system, but you have to show the courage to resist the impending evil. For it is evil. But Democrats act like it’s a game with dirty players.

what is your suggestion of an alternative?

it's like loving grandparents who have kept a lakefront cabin for grandchildren to visit, canoes, hiking trails, etc., & it is revealed one summer that the grandkids just don't want to come; they have been bored for years; their interests are elsewhere. one generation can't prescribe for another.

older liberals, recalling the enormous energy & sense of a united purpose (anti-Vietnam War, pro-Civil Rights) of the 1960's, have to acknowledge that there is nothing remotely like such idealism today. & if younger voters don't care about their future, what purpose to trying to convince them?

it's hard not to feel this way. in liberal circles there is a sense of bafflement which doesn't rise to the level of anything like rage or fury or literal fear, that so-sensible policies like environmental protection /women's rights meant so little (evidently) to younger voters.

certainly this is a reasonable position. but there is so much unknown. should we always assume forever that opponents of Democrats will not try to "rig" elections? is this not a tremendous handicap? always to be gracious in concession seems to argue a lack of passion or faith in one's mission.

Best climate scientists now address the psychology of disinformation and solution aversion. There are tremendous headwinds from fossil fuel companies, but even those senators bringing snowballs to the room have to eventually concede the weather has changed. Problem is it will soon be too late.

You certainly haven’t read my posts with much comprehension. Why bother at all ?

stubbornly, aggressively--about 2020 election results, Democrats concede almost immediately without objections. I am not saying that this is wrong but rather, it suggests a lack of passion disproportionate with the crises of our society & their own election rhetoric.

there seems to be a great disconnect between the urgency & importance of the Democratic position (on virtually everything including environment, women's rights, gun control, education) & the lackluster public response when Republicans out-maneuver them. where GOP fought for years--

Because it would have taken this long and the US would have no president for too long. They should have done it anyway but this was a DNC decision, not any one person.

very handsome kitty!

Religious freedom means that I’m free from your Bronze Age Fairy Tale and selective morality.

well, that isn't true. these are certainly "moral" people. all in a quandary, one would guess.
massive rejections & much indifference from voters makes many liberals think: how, why are we so irrelevant? don't young people care after all about gun control, women's rights, the environment? not much?

-
@joycecaroloates.bsky.social

in person they are very unhappy about the outcome of the election; but, they do not behave as if "this is the most important election in US history."
there was a disconnect between pre-election rhetoric & the quick concession to defeat as if to acknowledge that the rhetoric was hyperbolic after all.

@joycecaroloates.bsky.social

I took this sunset photo in Frenchtown, NJ on 8/2/25. If you zoom in, you can see a fisherman under the bridge. ⁦‪‬⁩

always the rejoinder: we must be quiet, subdued, well-mannered which will make a favorable impression on MAGA folks who believe that T***p should have absolute power & that liberals are criminal traitors & should be incarcerated, or worse.
how did that turn out?

like Merrick Garland: "Oh! Sorry. 'Time ran out.'"
they all return or retire to comfortable lives allowing us to think that the ceaseless rhetoric of "most important election in US history" was just campaign rhetoric, nothing real or crucial.

this is how many have felt. "we are not experts..." so we must rely upon expert advice; in this case, a kind of hurried concession in an election the hyperbole was telling us was the most important election in US history!!!--yet, time came, Democrats just smiled & said, "We lost."