Hawk...Democrats Had One Job

[NowsTheTime]

[Wiz Imp]

1. What a terrible take this is.

By most accounts, Spanberger's response was stellar, including here on DU where I've seen tons of praise and not a single negative comment (though I'm sure some people here will complain about it). I don't know why this guy's videos are posted here. His takes are routinely terrible. The purpose of DU is not to bash Democrats.

[bottomofthehill]

2. The target audience was the swing states.

Enough of the BS outrage please. The response to the SOTU is not Festivus, airing of the grievances. One of the great knocks against the president is the chaos he sows. Governor Spanburger is the opposite, level headed, clam, realistic and a very good person to target the swing states with a “middle” message. If we needed a firebrand to engage the progressives than we are fucked.

Can anyone think of the last great SOTU response from either the Democrats or the Republicans….. they don’t exist. POTUS has already sucked the media oxygen from the room. Rehashing what we all know ( Jan 6, pardons,Epstein, Gaza, bla, bla, bla).

Democrats have to realize they have to win swing seats in marginal districts and screaming Mandami does not to that. If candidates can show Mayor Mandamis passion, knowledge of issues and organizational skill and prove they are best for the district they have a chance, but Iowa where we have a chance to pick up seats and maybe steal a senate seat, is not New York City

[ChicagoTeamster]

3. This is the Carville/Clinton wing of the party trying to not offend their corporate donors.

They think they have to be seen as "playing nice". The "when they go low we go high" schtick is being taken too far.

There's nothing to be lost by pointing out the Epstein connections and other crimes. They should have capitalized on that.
They should have talked about Trump's Obamas as Apes cartoon.

Trump brought up Ukraine as his SOTU coincided with the 4th anniversary. Dem response should have brought up Trump team's favoring the Russian side in negotiations but they followed a pre-scripted response instead that obviously missed the significance of the date.

They could have just pointed out his racism, criminal liability, and his family profiting off of the presidency while Americans suffer. Then they could have followed up from there with his immigration and trade polices, making sure to point out that Americans are being murdered by his gestapo and named Pretti and Goode, then highlighted the true state of the economy and from there finished up with fact-checking Trump's claims.

Maybe Dems need to escalate from Go-low, Go-high to "when they go low, we drag them straight to hell"

[Trueblue Texan]

4. I am not surprised that Hawk, one who is typically credited as a Progressive...

...stepped up to the obligatory plate to bash something important the Democratic Party did. It really doesn't matter who delivered the rebuttal or the points made--no matter what they were, there would have been SOMEONE who stepped up to criticize it. If not Hawk, it would have been someone else. So easy for a podcaster to offer his fury and criticism of an elected official who just might have done a bit more homework understanding her audience than he did--her audience was much broader than his podcast audience, but don't expect him to acknowledge that. His job was to step up and shit on the Democratic response because, you know...someone had to do it. It's how progressives show they are objective. It's often how they help Democrats lose. FU, Hawk. I will be unsubscribing. So much for you knowing your audience.

[NowsTheTime]

5. While I disagree with part of what he said, We need to restate regime's terrible behavior...We Need to Fight Back!

[SonOfNebanaube]

6. He's not wrong... n/t