• InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    I found it here.

    Abortion is a bad example here, but it is one hundred percent true that we need candidates who can compete in deep red contexts, and that means taking positions at odds with the national party. If you want to know why that doesn’t compromise national policy goals, think about why you hate Collins.

    https://bsky.app/profile/dhnexon.bsky.social/post/3lzbp2m6mhc2h

    No log-in https://subium.com/profile/dhnexon.bsky.social/post/3lzbp2m6mhc2h

    -–

    The thread is a trip. It’s dull as can be but it’s like literally overhearing libs at brunch passionately debating what the democratic party should do “going forward”. And the brunchers think it’s exceeding clever, canny, and good politics for the dems to boldly move to the right. I assume “Collins” means Susan Collins. But I could be wrong.

    -–

    Edit

    I googled the Bluesky poster. I didn’t expect to find anything but I uncovered this gem.

    Daniel Nexon

    Nexon co-edited a volume titled Harry Potter and International Relations, published in 2006, that applies international relations theorizing to the world of Harry Potter and the politics of Harry Potter in general.