https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/11/beto-orourke-stacey-abrams-superstar-loser/671959/
Also says:
A meaningful defeat may be the most Abrams and O'Rourke can hope for: not so much superstar losers as losers with legacies. But losers have a special utility. Winners have to deal with the unglamorous minutiae of actual governance. They have to figure out how to translate campaign promises into concrete policies. They make mistakes, and people get disillusioned, and approval ratings decline. Losers are spared these indignities. Politically speaking, they don't survive long enough to let anyone down.
The Atlantic is saying that Beto being a loser is a good thing. Now that it looks like Beto is going to lose for a third time in 4 years they are saying that it is a good thing. Why are the bicoastal libs so obsessed with running cover for this man?
Also says:
A meaningful defeat may be the most Abrams and O'Rourke can hope for: not so much superstar losers as losers with legacies. But losers have a special utility. Winners have to deal with the unglamorous minutiae of actual governance. They have to figure out how to translate campaign promises into concrete policies. They make mistakes, and people get disillusioned, and approval ratings decline. Losers are spared these indignities. Politically speaking, they don't survive long enough to let anyone down.
The Atlantic is saying that Beto being a loser is a good thing. Now that it looks like Beto is going to lose for a third time in 4 years they are saying that it is a good thing. Why are the bicoastal libs so obsessed with running cover for this man?