Even the Democrat signs were claiming the referendum was to stop a “MAGA takeover”, which was in no way true, not even remotely.

I’m saddened and disgusted that 3 Supreme Court judges, presumably Democrats, did not judge in favor of the Rule of Law. I have no doubts they had spelled some kind of contrived, Katanjic reasons for doing so in their dissent.

But with approximately 47+/- % of the population thus deluded, it is hard to understand why the sane have not rejected this a long time ago – effectively and forcefully via legal and persuasion means.

— R2L

It’s not 47%. Not even close. Maybe 20%, and not all of them are all-the-way-nuts.

Yes, the Dems pull half the electorate, but the Dem voting ranks are a vast coalition of many different agendas and priorities.

For ex, a big chunk of the Dem voting ranks vote for them for purely economic reasons, they reject what they perceive as the GOP business agenda (free trade, unlimited immigration, no worker protections, etc.) Until fairly recently they were right to think that, that is what the Old Guard wants. Thom Tillis, Cornyn, Mitch McConnell, etc. would love nothing better than to go back to that.

Those people might even agree with us about how crazy the progressive/liberal faction is, but they prioritize economics over it. For ex, you can point out that the Dems want limitless immigration, and they would agree that that is bad, but point out that the GOP business wing, want exactly the same thing. Prior to Trump, the GOP and the Dems were basically exactly the same on immigration.

You could point out to them that the Dem social agenda is nuts, and some of them would agree, but then observe that the GOP only pretends to oppose that. Prior to Trump…they’d mostly be right.

It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking the entire 50% of the electorate that votes Dem believe all the crap, but they don’t. Which is both a hopeful thing and a frustrating one. Hopeful because it’s possible to peel those people off, eventually, frustrating because they have different priorities than we do, even so.

I don’t even recognize all of these flags anymore.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/hhvsev2w0aexg3d.jpg

Solzhenitsyn knew what the issue was.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/hhubi4yxaaiaauu.jpg

From an earlier Hoyt meme post; check the attribution.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/communism_by_rapierwitt.jpg

This is clearly logical.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/hhwfaalxcaasymz.jpg
And now the Democrats are literally voting for a neo-Nazi in Maine.

Studies support the conclusion that being a Leftist leads to mental illness, even when it doesn’t stem from being mentally ill.
They need help.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/1898724513768546304.jpg

@MJR: “… even the haters act at least a wee bit less uncivil, a wee bit less bilious, in an eye-to-eye contact scenario, as compared to a less personal scenario.”
Maybe because (outside of joint video sessions?) the presence of eye to eye contact could devolve into a scenario of fist to nose contact!!
That seldom ends well for either the sender or the receiver.

Nothing will work on that crowd. Nothing. As has been pointed out many times before, we cannot reason people out of something that they were never reasoned into. Is there any hope, other than waiting for the denizens of the leftist bubble to die off naturally, but to work on their (figurative if not literal) offspring?

As Nate Winchester (11:03 am) observes, “there’s always a new cadre of new people coming up in the world.” Does our side do with them as the Gramscian marchers did to our generation? It’s a really, really tall order but I don’t see an alternative. Do you?

In conclusion, I agree very much with both Nate Winchester and physicsguy. How so?

The first position is applicable to voicing a viewpoint in what is a figurative public square, and the second position is applicable to personal one-on-one social interactions.

— — — — —

Happy Mothers’ Day, all!

Unfortunately, in the sphere I encounter these people there are no innocents. They exist within a perfect leftist bubble where they all reinforce their beliefs. You have to remember that for these people politics has become a substitute for religion so it takes on all the worst aspects of a fanatical religion. Nate, there’s no point in even engaging with these people. As was mentioned, the fact that 47% of the population may fall into this category is concerning, but changing them by argument is not going to work. It’s going to take something much more direct and concrete.

LOL, I just saw a few hours ago how one of them was again complaining that the conservative people are no longer showing up on my friend’s FB page. By not being there we are taking away from their fun of having a 2 minute hate. It’s like a toddler being ignored.

I cannot argue with that. I can only point out that after years and years, after decades and decades, “preserve my sanity” takes on a very real and literal urgency. Let me put it this way: at my advanced age, which is advancing more and more relentlessly as time lurches on, I am more and more inclined to leave the field to the younger turks.

I’m finding I need to step back from the field of battle, because for me, exhaustion and weariness have become very aggressive and are winning more and more. Needless to say, I very much credit the point you’re urging on us.

Yes, definitely, with the ongoing exception of feral, rabid haters who are so blinded by their bile that they can’t even act civil. But then again (I’m thinking out loud here), even in a face-to-face situation, I’ll bet that in many to most cases, even the haters act at least a wee bit less uncivil, a wee bit less bilious, in an eye-to-eye contact scenario, as compared to a less personal scenario. So . . . yes, definitely.

Molly Brown (4:30 am) said, “The issue is never the issue, the issue is always the revolution.”

True enough. Those words come down to us courtesy of David Horowitz, whose exact words were, “An SDS radical once wrote, ‘The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.’ In other words the cause – whether inner city blacks or women – is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause which is the accumulation of power to make the revolution.”