Ovvio, in campagna elettorale deve garantire gli stipendi delle forze armate, anche perché la devono difendere dai Maga dal day1
Again, ha estrapolato selettivamente discorsi mirati a pescare pesci dagli indecisi e dal “centro”, ovvio che sono simili, l’esca è per forza la stessa.
Se estrapoli da discorsi fatti per elettori più polarizzati, le differenze saranno evidenti.
Cosa c’entrano i donors con la politica estera e l’immigrazione?.
Jill Stein sul pezzo, come sempre 
Ma poi Jill Stein a una certa non si era espressa a favore di Donald Trump? Ricordo male?
Vabbè ma è tutta roba presa dal “breviario delle frasi fatte per il candidato alle elezioni”
Tipo “sarò il presidente di tutti”
Comunque ci sono voluti 10 minuti perche’ Kamala tornasse sui suoi passi e iniziasse a fare dichiarazioni supercentriste, appena hanno annusato che ora ha un chance di vincere vedi come vanno sul filo del rasoio della impopolarita’ perche’ non sia mai che si porta avanti una qualche policy progressista.
Ragazzi non serve il fact check, video così sono mezze trollate, ma diciamo che mi hanno fatto sorridere le parti sovrapponibili.
Comunque il pezzo the most lethal forces in the world 
è da psicopatico, non vi ha fatto nemmeno un po’ specie sentirglielo dire?
È da quando ho memoria che glielo sento propagandare, tramite qualsiasi media, e se non ci fosse la nato, finanziata in gran parte da loro, noi saremmo mangime per pesci, quindi no, non mi stupisce.
Senza la Nato probabilmente non avremmo avuto neanche Piazza Fontana, quindi insomma
Breaking news: le forze armate devono essere in grado di uccidere.
A me fa ridere un casino che scrivete queste cose e poi pretendete che gli US siano una democrazia.
È campagna elettorale, son promesse da marinaio che devi fare
se non le fai, mandi il segnale che lo status quo non ti comoda ( aka passive aggressive behaviour) e quindi tendono a non votarti
Chissa’ perche’ fino a quando Kamala aveva posizioni piu’ progressiste (inclusa la scelta di Walz come vice) andava su nei sondaggi, ora vediamo che succede.
A me fa ridere che “Omg ha scelto il progressita, avete visto che è veramente di sinistra!”.
Poi appena apre bocca su roba tipo la sanità, manda i chiari segnali “Tranquilli che sono centrista, voglio solo abbassare l’aspirina di qualche $ alzando il pugno al cielo tipo rivoluzionaria”.
Mmmh è quasi come se…
stesse cercando di paraculare sia il centro che la sinistra, senza prendere precisi impegni 
E’ fortunata che la endorsa chiunque non sia trumpiano, visto che appunto l’alternativa è quella.
Per me se vince sarà un presidente irrilevante, al di là che è la 1a donna, ma irrilevante batte la dittatura.
Fanno ridere perche dato che si gioca tutto sul “winner take all”, passano il tempo a fare compromessi e a cercare sempre piu di allargare la cerchia inserendo infiniti gruppi con valori diversi, per poi ovviamente non fare un cazzo di niente in caso di vittoria per la maggior parte. Ti basta guardarli al tempo quando facevano i dibattiti per chi doveva essere il candidato da presentare, tiravano frecciate manco avessero il peggior nemico nel mirino. Finita la commedia ti ritrovi il tuo candidato con valori abbastanza distanti da chi adesso e il nominato che gli tira l’endorsement. Li ti ritrovi ovviamente anche te a fare un compromesso su i tuoi principi perche altrimenti vince Satana. C’e’ anche chi, e fatico a dargli torto, si incazza e dice “andatevene affanculo perche i casi sono due, o siete tutti sociopatici o mi avete preso per il culo”. E chi decide di ingoiare il compromesso non ti vota piu la seconda volta dopo che in quattro anni per lui non hai fatto un cazzo di niente.
mi è parso interessante questo
The growing gender gap among young people
In politics, we are seeing a gender gap amongst today’s youngest voters—aged 18 to 29—with young women being significantly more Democratic in their political leanings than young men.
Young women have become significantly more liberal and embraced “anti-patriarchal” values over the last decade, while young men have stayed relatively the same.
Young men increasingly feel as though they have been experiencing discrimination over the past four years.
In politics, the “gender gap” is the difference in the percentage of women and the percentage of men voting for a given candidate.1 The political gender gap has appeared in one way or the other in every election since 1980 with women tending to vote for the Democratic Party and men tending to vote for the Republican Party. But the apparent gender gap among young voters also appears in measures other than politics and points to some deeper and potentially even more concerning issues among young people.
In politics, we are seeing a gender gap amongst today’s youngest voters—aged 18 to 29—with young women being significantly more Democratic in their political leanings than young men. For instance, a recently released national poll by the Institute of Politics (IOP) at Harvard Kennedy School finds that among 18 to 29-year-olds, President Biden’s lead with women is +33 points in contrast to young men where his lead drops to a mere six points. When compared to this stage of the 2020 campaign, Biden’s lead among women was nearly identical (+35), while his lead with men stood at +26, representing a steep drop in just the past four years.
When it comes to party identification, Democrats have again lost significant ground with young men. In 2020, 42% of young men in Harvard’s poll identified as Democrats versus 20% who identified as Republican. Now, 32% are Democrats and 29% are Republicans, with the number of independents remaining relatively unchanged. Women over the same period have not moved as much. In 2020, 43% of young women in Harvard’s poll identified as Democrats, and 23% were Republicans. Now, 44% are Democrats, and 18% are Republicans.
Meanwhile, a recently released Economist/YouGov survey shows a staggering rise in support for Donald Trump among young people. In fact, the rise in Trump favorability among the young outstrips the rise in favorability among all other groups in the population except Democrats and liberals. We should view these polls with caution, especially because the subgroups are often too small to be statistically significant.
There are other indications of a growing gender divide among young people that goes deeper than just politics. For instance, a longitudinal analysis by international research agency Glocalities between 2014 and 2023 highlighted the growing rift in Gen Z. It found that young women have become significantly more liberal and embraced “anti-patriarchal” values over the last decade, while young men have stayed relatively the same. Additionally, it showed that young men have been the slowest among all groups to move towards more liberal values over the nearly 10-year period.
Glocalities found young women are most concerned about issues like “sexual harassment, domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, and mental health problems.” Men were generally more focused on “competition, bravery, and honor.” The study found young men have become more patriarchal in their orientations overall when compared with women and even older men.
The analysis further linked “feelings of despair and societal disillusionment, a focus on patriarchal values, and rebelling against cosmopolitan liberal values” to the growing rise of the radical right. This leads many to fear that as young men are resisting the tides of change, they may be vulnerable to far-right groups and movements who promise a return to more patriarchal systems which offer a break from the social developments which they believe have begun to unfairly work against their societal interests.
Gallup recently studied the gender divide and found roughly 25% of men aged 18 to 29 identify as “liberal,” versus 40% of women in the same demographic—up from 28% in 2003. Men were found yet again to be relatively unchanged in their self-identification during that timeline.
The Survey Center on American Life’s findings also support a divide in self-identification, with young women being much more likely to identify themselves as “feminists” than young men. Only 43% of Gen Z men identify in this way, much less than Millennial men, while 61% of Gen Z women describe themselves as feminist compared to 54% of Millennial women and 49% of Generation X women.
Men in particular feel isolated. Brookings nonresident senior fellow, Richard Reeves, has studied the issue arguing in his book “Of Boys and Men” that rapid societal changes combined with a market shift from brawn to brain have left many men feeling bereft and without purpose. Reeves, a self-described “feminist”, does not make the argument that the liberation of women is a bad thing but instead suggests finding new roles for men and a redefinition of “masculinity” in this changing world.
Young men have repeatedly been found in recent years to be apathetic towards voting, with young women in recent election cycles constantly turning out to vote at higher rates than young men. Politically, this is good news for Democrats. After all, there are more women than men in the country, they make up a larger portion of the electorate, they are more motivated to vote, and vote blue. From a societal perspective, it could signal potential danger if young men feel less tied to democracy and feel no need to participate in the democratic process while increasingly becoming disheartened with their social status. The incentive for change and action may be there, but not through democratic means. This is made more disconcerting by the fact that this is coming at a time when democracy could yet again be in peril this election year. But what exactly are men experiencing which could make this scenario a potential reality? Well, young men are overwhelmingly the loneliest demographic, with 63% of men aged 18 to 29 reporting being single, compared to 34% of women in the same age group.
Suicide rates among men in 2021 were four times higher among males than females. Men commit almost 96% of the mass shootings in the country, demonstrating how men are very likely to act upon their social isolation in extremely violent ways. In education, women now receive 58% of bachelor’s degrees and 61% of master’s degrees, representing yet another area where men are increasingly falling behind.
The social isolation of men creates major ramifications for women as well. Based on Census Bureau historical data and Morgan Stanley forecasts, 45% of prime working age women (ages 25 to 44) will be single by 2030—the largest share in history—up from 41% in 2018. The social bonds of previous generations appear to be eroding among young people, and this has serious consequences for coupling, future birth rates, and social cohesion.
There are also darker concerns about the potential backlash to recent social developments. History is littered with examples of nations suffering from the consequences of young men finding themselves idle without purpose.
We may be in the opening stages of a social backlash to the progressive social movements of the past decades. When significant societal change occurs, some may feel left behind or cheated. Right now, young men fall into that camp. The challenge now will be ensuring that the backlash does not transform into real damage, especially for women. If the aim is to build a fairer equitable future where all feel they have a role and are respected, the polling of Gen Z appears to show we are moving in the opposite direction.
Per quello che ho capito, avendo un sistema bipartitico, il congresso viene composto piu o meno come il parlamento italiano dall’era BS in poi, ovvero 50,6 % da una parte e 49,4 % dall’altra.
Il che vuol dire che poi legiferare su un argomento diventa un incubo, perche basta qualche congress man con interessi opposti per mandarti in minoranza e non far approvare
Non a caso, imho, gli obama hanno dato una “svegliata” ai democratici al congresso, spingendo per portare piu gente possibile a votare, proprio per evitare lo stallo in congresso.