What is he talking about? Who is he talking to?
The left spends millions, if not billions, on politics. If you include the entire Democratic coalition it's well over billions. If you include the media aligned with the Democrats the amount is insane.
He's trying to lecture Twitter/Tumblr leftists as if what they do isn't potentially more important than what John claims he does. Every survey of Twitter finds it's far to the left of the population, it's massively more Democrat, it's overrepresented in media and political people. This is exactly where the "debate" of the so-called left will happen. (And with social media's modern silo capabilities I think it's also where a lot of the "debate" of the right is happening.) That's what he's seeing rather than some hobbling of the left. The actual problem is that the left's positions, even after being filtered through the debate of Twitter, aren't popular. Not even among Democrats. The "failure" of the Twitter Left is that they don't realize this because every single one of them, like John especially, thinks that they actually know everything about anything simply because of who they are and that their position is so perfectly true that if everyone just does as they say electoral victories will happen and utopia will follow.
His comparison to libertarians doesn't make any sense either, libertarians don't fail at politics because of infighting on Twitter (nor anywhere else even though libertarian infighting is most of what libertarians do), they fail in politics because they're a fringe view that probably tops out at 5-10% of Americans. Libertarian-leaners are much stronger and libertarians have much more success there, before the modern Trump era, libertarians basically won the fight on the right over free speech. Alito is the only Republican Justice appointed this century who wants to reverse the libertarian victories at the Supreme Court on the First Amendment, none of Trump's Justices have indicated they agree with Alito across the board, even Thomas doesn't get any agreement on his few deviations on it except with one of them. Federalist Society judges have been more libertarian on this than prior conservative judges. Libertarians won the fight on the right on taxes, it's basically a death knell for a Republican to agree to tax increases of any kind. Libertarian views on foreign policy are stronger now even among the Trump coalition. The most successful elections in history for the actual Libertarian Party are all since 2013. The Koch Network never had more influence in the Republican Party than it had when the Tea Party ascended and it willingly withdrew because it was opposed to Trump, it'll be back.
John finally talks about running ads, endorsing candidates, etc. But he's a fucking loser. Nina Turner lost twice in a primary AKA FACTIONALIZATION, with John's "full" support she lost even worse than she had before. With John's support that Buffalo mayor candidate lost despite having the Democratic nomination to a write-in. John himself tried to primary AKA FACTIONALIZATION a sitting Democratic Congressman twice and got destroyed both times. All he ever does outside of this failure is lecture people on Twitter, where he also fails continuously. Who among Democrats has he supported on Twitter who's won both in the primary and the general?
When John either personally ran or supported primaries against sitting Democratic Congresspeople like Stephen Lynch and Shontel Brown was he coalition building or treating the majority of the Democratic Party and again, sitting popular Congresspeople, as disposable?
Just what the fuck is this "political professional" even talking about? "Do as I say, not as I do"? Yeah, we already knew that since it's basically the only honest part of your entire philosophy, thanks idiot.
