Democrats are trying to explain their vote collapse, but they also acknowledge that Joe Biden’s administration and all of their fatal policies were a failure. They are doing the same point because the regional news media is primarily focused on supporting Democrats.
David Brooks, a liberal columnist for the New York Times who often votes for Democrats, is the embodiment of this dynamic. This year, Brooks wrote a rambling and confusing item that would have been necessary to explain the political bloodbath ( are we still permitted to use that term? ) as a result of Democrats ‘ flawed social research.
” Many of us are walking around with broken emotional types”, he wrote on Thursday. Many of us experience false beliefs about how the universe operates throughout our lives. He claimed that” a certain worldview that emphasizes racial, gender, and ethnic identity has been prevalent in the neighborhoods where highly educated people gather,” but that “many people do n’t act like ambassadors from this or that group.” They have a surprising amount of self-assurance.
True, large numbers of Americans say they’re repulsed by the “woke” and transgender drivel they’re force-fed by Democrats and the internet. They are asked about it, which is one of the most annoying issues connected to the party, and that’s because of it. However, they constantly look at where they can save a few dollars, how much more they can cut again, and which credit cards makes the most sense when it comes to buying the bare necessities for the next food operate.
Liberals made them accomplish that. And when they forced them to do that, it was even more irksome to watch Democrats welcome the world’s homeless at the southern border, who had untold numbers of migrants who were then cared for at the expense of American taxpayers, who oddly did n’t need any more issues.
The regular haranguing about cultural “equity”, transgender “rights” and “women of shade” is enough to make people leave the room. But you ca n’t persuade me that Democrats could have at least remained in power if they had n’t stopped being so annoying.
They were n’t just irritating. They passed a lot of pointless regulations that caused everyone else to determine how far they could not afford to avoid having to spend money on their retirement accounts.
Yes, Democrat officials and the internet are a judgmental, undesirable team preoccupied with race, gender, and sexual identity. However, David Brooks and his fellow members pretend to be in good condition by pretending that the group’s dangerous policies on the market, the border, and foreign affairs would be more trivial.
That’s not it, which means that Brooks is both stupid or he’s selfish. Either approach, he may lose his job explaining elections.
