I never heard of Iran having sleeper cells
I mean yeah that’s kinda the point of sleeper cells.
“So Steve, what do you do for a living?”
“Oh I’m an agent of a foreign country waiting for a signal to strike.”
“Nice, same.”
Does the US have sleeper cells?
Hmm it’s an interesting question. I would say no for two reasons. The US has enough military power to do what they want overtly (see 2026), and I doubt the US could keep something like that quiet for long enough to matter. Surely something like that would have been leaked if anyone knew about it.
The most conventionally powerful military won’t have nearly as much need to plan for being on the smaller side of an asymmetric war.
I mean… Activating military and intelligence assets is typically what a country does when you start bombing it.
If iran sleeper cells are real why didn’t ICE go after them
Real
‘Some people will die’: Trump
I have know idea why he is still in Office.
It’s because enough people in the swing states just couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a President with the wrong genitals.
It’s weird to keep running back to “Harris only lost because she was a women” when multiple women won states that she lost. Michigan handed Democrat Elissa Slotkin the Senate seat, while breaking for Trump nationally. Arizona had just put up Katie Hobbs for governor two years earlier. NV-3 put up Dem Susie Lee to Congress while voting for Trump overall.
Consistently, the Trump/Harris divide came in the negative - people turned out for Trump and only Trump, leaving the downticket blank. Republicans had a significant Presidential over vote purely based on the MAGA cult of personality. Trump’s coat tails ran into the negatives.
Hillary ran into the same problem in 2020. She was personally toxic, losing in states that other Democrats won, largely because her own personal brand was in the trash. This was not a problem for other candidates because they hadn’t spent a prior decade going on national TV and alternately enraging and disgusting people.
It also cannot be understated that mail-in voting massively inflated liberal turnout in 2020. Dems had the opportunity to keep that ball rolling with a national voting rights act they could have passed through their bicameral majority. They decided it wasn’t important. And then Republicans made huge inroads in 2022 and 2024 by disenfranchising elderly liberal voters - particularly voters of color - by rolling back mail-in ballot laws in every state they controlled.
You might also note that Dems keep having the opportunity to make DC a state (two free senators and 2-3 free house reps!) and not doing it. Again, this is not a decision Republicans are forcing them to make.
No, Harris didn’t only lose because she was a woman. But it didn’t help. I think Americans hold the Presidency in a different regard than other offices. Some Americans who would be perfectly fine with women in other offices will draw the line at President.
The thing is, they may not even be conscious of it. They might just have that nagging concern that they can’t quite out their finger on, leading them to dismiss the female candidates out of hand, without even realizing their lizard brain won’t let them fairly consider them.
But it didn’t help.
The biggest thing holding Harris back was not being on the Epstein plane when she had the chance.
All the Silicon Valley freaks turned on the Dem Party to support Trump. If Biden had stayed in, he’d have lost just as hard. If Tim Walz had been at the top of the ticket, he’d have lost, too.
The thing is, they may not even be conscious of it.
Again, you’re flat out ignoring all the women who won in 2024 (and beyond) by these same voters.
Even in a race where it was Trump/Harris and R-Man/D-Woman, both Trump and the liberal woman would win.
You can’t explain that with subconscious bias.
Harris and Clinton lost because not enough Americans voted for them and being women and in Harris’s case being black and Indian was a reason for a lot of people not to vote.
Harris and Clinton lost because not enough Americans voted for them
The only correct part of this answer
Clinton won the popular vote . Thr problem is your trashy two party system that americans never tried to change for over a century.
Instead of crying about the past, you should fight for a better future
your trashy two party system that americans never tried to change
They’ve tried to change it repeatedly. Everyone from Ralph Nader to Ross Perot to George Wallace to Eugene Debbs have lead caucuses to try to change it.
Instead of crying about the past
Those who ignore the past…
But then you’ve got folks who really do believe the problem with the Democratic Party is that they try to win women’s votes at all. All to often, I see the complaint aimed at the two-party system that it’s one party too many.
I think you are underestimating the sexism and racism in America.
It is being held up as an excuse within the liberal party to keep women down. The message the party leadership wants to send is that they ran a flawless campaign and the voters failed them.
Always and forever, folks like Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries want you to believe they need to embrace fascism in order to win elections. Had Harris or Clinton won, we’d have been told they were only victorious because they campaigned to the right of their progressive base. Now that they’ve lost, they get to argue the need to purge feminists from the party if they want another chance at the majority.
do not feed the troll
I saw the democrats run against the republicans with the republicans telling us they’d be dictators.
I don’t know what you’re talking about when you say ‘folks like Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries want you to believe they need to embrace fascism in order to win elections’ that feels like a .ml talking point.
And years of fox propaganda, and voter suppression, and bomb threats, and bribery, and ‘sweepstakes’, and… and… and…
The Grand Old Peds did absolutely everything they could to sway the election just to keep Sir Shitsalot out of prison and gain control.
I wonder if that shooting in Austin was this…?
