|
mooyashi posted:i mean i remember reading him making a statement about "blowing up the IRS" after the whole "Destroy the Washington machine" and wondering if his campaign was going to just keep escalating the imagery of leveling DC as we know it and here we are Sounds like a terrorist to me
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
I'd support a candidate with strong promises to take a wrecking crew to the Capitol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Feather posted:I'm sorry, I have trouble understanding condescension, especially from people who spout talking points, dismiss arguments out of hand, try to pass that off as rigorous debate, and then get butt-hurt when they're subsequently ignored. But, do go on. Okay. I'm not sure what you mean by 'talking points'. Whose talking points am I repeating? I haven't dismissed any arguments out of hand--I've substantially responded to everything that's been said. You, on the other hand, have claimed to respond to stuff that I've said when you haven't, and then refused to acknowledge it. You basically did exactly what you accused me of doing, and were super-condescending about it, too. I asked you how economics caused racism, and your response was to cite slavery. When I told you that wasn't really a sufficient answer, you said: quote:It's a perfectly sufficient answer, and if you actually knew anything about the history of slavery and America you'd understand why. That's why I wrote what I did: it's simply not worth the time to give you an entire history of slavery and its relationship with the economy (at large and specifically for that minority group) in a forums post. I'd basically be providing the entire education you should have received from middle-school through undergraduate study. This was bafflingly condescending and did nothing to actually answer the challenge. Slavery was enabled by racism, and racism continues to be a force above and beyond class that keeps black people from realizing economic gains even when others in their class does. I think that Sanders probably knows this, and as Supraluminal said there's a certain power in hewing completely to a single message and Sanders has plenty of time to talk and address directly the problems of racism that are above and beyond economics and class. You seem to be mixing up the idea that slavery was economically beneficial to the slave-owners--very true--with the idea that therefore economics caused slavery, which isn't true. Our society would not have endured white slavery. That capitalists use the divisions caused by racism to exploit workers is not the same thing as those divisions being caused by economics or class. It's also really silly of you to talk about me being condescending when you write stuff about how I don't know anything about slavery and you've got to teach me middle school. quote:Well, you're half right about the cause of poverty and unemployment in the black community. Just like Sanders is half right about it, as I've noted multiple times. The cause of greater relative poverty and unemployment in the black community is racism. You definitely have acknowledged that racism is 'intertwined' with economic issues, but that really still isn't it. The reason that we talk about black issues at all, and we don't talk about irish issues or italian issues or any of the rest of that, is that the problems specific to the black community absolutely stem from racism. Racism causes the economic problems. Even when black people gain economic power, they are unable to translate that into lasting gains, because of racism. I'm not going to engage with you any more on this, because your constant accusations that anyone talking about this is 'mendacious', that Hillary is just 'pandering' to the black community--as if black people aren't actually capable of discerning who to support on their own--and the staggering hypocrisy of calling me condescending while lecturing me on how I lack a middle school education. Just please consider, since I very much like Sanders too, trying to not show your contempt for people who are supporting Hillary Clinton and dismiss the concerns of minority voters and call outreach to them simply pandering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:The below are the five most recent nationwide polls for the 2016 Democratic primary and the five most recent for 2008 Democratic primary as of eight years ago today according to Wikipedia. That's not too bad really, especially when you consider that 2016 primaries are going to start in February instead of January. Also there had been 2 debates at this point in 2007 compared to 0 in 2015.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
As in all things, especially politics, I believe the truth shall meet in the middle: Bernie will do significantly better in the primary than many goons predict, but will not win the candidacy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
Some serious trolling by Sanders:quote:
 Also: quote:
Bernmentum!
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Clinton's campaign so far has been pretty drat leftist, compared to recent major Dem candidates. She's talking about stuff that Obama didn't even bother with.  Is this the first election cycle you've ever followed? Hillary is a product that has undergone multimillion dollar focus-grouping in order to generate just the right publicity surrounding its launch that Americans decide to make a non-refundable pre-order on November 4th, 2016. The reason her words are now playing to the left is that the left-leaning actions of her main opponent, Bernie Sanders, resonate with potential primary voters. To conclude that her current "pretty drat leftist" rhetoric somehow reverses her pretty drat rightist/centrist rhetoric and action of the past is dreadfully naive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:
Her and Bernie's Senate voting records are drat near identical.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Her and Bernie's Senate voting records are drat near identical. on bills proposed during GWB's presidency, only the last two years of which where Democrats controlled procedure? SHOCK
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
hillary, by all accounts, is pretty loving left, just she has to account for the political system which chains her pretty Actual Views. she might even be trolling the corporations with her doublespeak and go "lol gently caress that" when she gets in office. she is actually holds Pretty Good Views, but those come after her legacy and corporate interests that she feels are necessary for her to get elected. she wont give the finger to the banks, but that would be funny if all of her word twisting was her not trying to piss them off, and not people. again, not happening, but lol at the idea i guess
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Why has the thread title and icon become hispanic? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Why has the thread title and icon become hispanic? Jeb is running as the first Latino president.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
mooyashi posted:i mean i remember reading him making a statement about "blowing up the IRS" after the whole "Destroy the Washington machine" and wondering if his campaign was going to just keep escalating the imagery of leveling DC as we know it and here we are Someone talked him out of "fly a plane into the IRS".
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
mooyashi posted:on bills proposed during GWB's presidency, only the last two years of which where Democrats controlled procedure? Not my fault that's the only comparable period. She really could have gone over to blue dog-type voting positions if that's what she truly wanted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Jeb is running as the first Latino president. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Why has the thread title and icon become hispanic? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ5iulTwAzQ
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
LOU BEGAS MUSTACHE posted:hillary, by all accounts, is pretty loving left, just she has to account for the political system which chains her pretty Actual Views. she might even be trolling the corporations with her doublespeak and go "lol gently caress that" when she gets in office. Yeah, this rings fairly hollow. She has some positions to the left, but her economic positions generally seem quite in favor of what corporations want. I don't see Hillary being that much different from Obama economically, possibly even further right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Her and Bernie's Senate voting records are drat near identical. Hillary and anyone who voted for the Iraq War is going to have to eat poo poo for it for the rest of their lives. It amazes me how easily people forgot how much the Iraq War was still an issue in 08. It was front and center of the debate between Obama and Hillary as it was between Obama and McCain.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:BUT THAT'S MARCO RUBIO'S SCHTICK! And Cruz's dad is a Cuban who fought for Fidel Castro, but you don't hear him being proud of his heritage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
Solid Poopsnake posted:I'd support a candidate with strong promises to take a wrecking crew to the Capitol. What? No, no. The Capitol is a beautiful, elegant building filled with the finest artwork, lovingly built and created by ordinary people from all over the nation. Don't send a wrecking crew there. Put a guillotine on the Capitol's front lawn, run all the occupants through it, and turn the Capitol into a museum. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
America needs Robespierre
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:And what? President Bernie is going to suddenly get decades-entrenched Congresscritters to throw down the oppressive weight of their corporate overlords and do the right thing? Rewrite the Constitution to fundamentally alter how the electoral process works? What you're talking about would require an en mass alteration of more or less the entire US political system from the state (in some cases, local) level upwards. You're talking about a revolution, not an election. I don't know if you've listened to any of Sanders' speeches or interviews, but he agrees with you. He literally says we need a political revolution. Overturning Citizens United and instituting public election financing are two of his talking points. However, I'm a realist - I know he's facing extremely long odds, and that he's not a wizard. Nobody can do what needs to be done alone. It's going to take an enormous amount of work to make headway on all of the problems we have to deal with. Do note that I said in the part of my post you quoted that "we need to be making active progress," not that we need to fix everything on Day 1 of the Sanders Presidency. Being a realist doesn't mean I have to be a defeatist, though. I choose to believe that it is still possible to win real progressive change - and even if it doesn't happen now, I'd rather fight for it and lose just the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/clinton/ Her history leads me to believe that she would be a far more leftist President than Obama. And really, how much longer is D&D, of all the people, going to obsess over Sanders as if he has any chance in hell of getting the nomination, much less the Presidency? It's like the PronHaul days all over again, just with less gold standard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:And really, how much longer is D&D, of all the people, going to obsess over Sanders as if he has any chance in hell of getting the nomination, much less the Presidency? It's like the PronHaul days all over again, just with less gold standard. It really even isn't close. People like Sanders, let them talk about him. Sure, he isn't going to win, but who cares? Everyone needs to have their political heart broken once, let people have that in their lives. Should we only talk about Bush and Clinton because no one else is going to win? That sounds boring. If Bernie talk is pissing you off so bad maybe you need to get some Xanax or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:Hillary and anyone who voted for the Iraq War is going to have to eat poo poo for it for the rest of their lives. It amazes me how easily people forgot how much the Iraq War was still an issue in 08. It was front and center of the debate between Obama and Hillary as it was between Obama and McCain. It's almost as though things can change in 8 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/clinton/ Is there another candidate to discuss on the Democratic side who's going to make it in any way interesting? There's a couple of people obsessed with Sanders, but I think most of us are just glad it's not going to be boring. Especially with the Republicans having an anal discharge consisting of a mix of fecal matter and semen and a man possessed by his extraterrestrial hair. I honestly tire of this notion of "D&D" like it's some kind of unitary hive-mind you are personally up against. There is no such thing, and if there were, it's not ba-ba for Bernie. You need but look at the arguments in the past couple of pages. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:And really, how much longer is D&D, of all the people, going to obsess over Sanders as if he has any chance in hell of getting the nomination, much less the Presidency? It's like the PronHaul days all over again, just with less gold standard. Her political donations alone make me suspect toward any of her left leaning economic policies. Nobody is entitled to become POTUS- especially Hillary. Lastly, she's rancid bait for any of her political opponents and people dump into her the same way people dumped into Ed Miliband. People can vote for many reasons: domestic policy, foreign policy, character, charisma, or even wealth. I'm voting for precedent because Sanders anywhere the White House would scare the ever living poo poo out of rich people. Salon as already given several good reasons not to vote for her. computer parts posted:It's almost as though things can change in 8 years. The public's perception of her hasn't. Her chances are no better than they were in 08. The best possible outcome is to sink the Clinton dynasty indefinitely and finally bury their god awful brand of liberalism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
God, I used to really enjoy reading Salon but I had to stop because it became total poo poo. I see it has only gotten worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:
The public's perception is not your perception.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The public's perception is not your perception. The favorability polls aren't your perception, either. Hillary has to sell to the Democrats that she's not the neoliberal shitheel her husband was and sell to the "independents" that she's not a stealth socialist. Watch her. She'll flip on policy this election faster than John Kerry. Job Truniht fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Jun 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
The American public has voted her the Most Admired Woman in the World for 17 out of the last 18 years. It doesn't matter how many lovely Salon articles you post when they don't actually reflect anything but that fact that she and the press loathe each other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:The favorability polls aren't your perception, either. Hillary has to sell to the Democrats that she's not the neoliberal shitheel her husband was and sell to the "independents" that she's not a stealth socialist. Watch her. She'll flip on policy this election faster than John Kerry. Hmm, let's look at some of the key Democratic demographics - young, non-white, and women. -Everyone below the age of 50 has Hillary at 54% favorable. - Non-whites have a 72% favorability towards Hillary Clinton. - Women have a 56% favorability towards Hillary Clinton. - Self described Democrats have an 87% favorability towards Hillary Clinton. Yes, I see the issue she has with Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Pohl posted:It really even isn't close. People like Sanders, let them talk about him. Sure, he isn't going to win, but who cares? Everyone needs to have their political heart broken once, let people have that in their lives. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:The American public has voted her the Most Admired Woman in the World for 17 out of the last 18 years. It doesn't matter how many lovely Salon articles you post when they don't actually reflect anything but that fact that she and the press loathe each other. Yeah, and 2008 happened. It's going to be beaten like a dead horse back. I really wish I could hunt down threads in the archives to see if there was a similar tone going on at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
downout posted:Yeah, this rings fairly hollow. She has some positions to the left, but her economic positions generally seem quite in favor of what corporations want. I don't see Hillary being that much different from Obama economically, possibly even further right. Not to mention her positions indicating she doesn't care about immigrant children, her votes on fences to keep 'em out, and her hatred of the poors (bankruptcy legislation favorable to the banks). If I didn't have such a low opinion of the average voter, and especially the average democrat, it would amaze me how easily they forget and how easily they are fooled.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/19/rick-perry-calls-charleston-church-shooting-accident/ Rick Perry: Accident!? I meant INCIDENT!
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:The favorability polls aren't your perception, either. Hillary has to sell to the Democrats that she's not the neoliberal shitheel her husband was and sell to the "independents" that she's not a stealth socialist. Watch her. She'll flip on policy this election faster than John Kerry. Find me a poll that breaks it down by demographics. Like, you know, the one that you put in initially and then edited out because it made you look bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Job Truniht posted:Yeah, and 2008 happened. It's going to be beaten like a dead horse back. I really wish I could hunt down threads in the archives to see if there was a similar tone going on at the time. You need a loving Xanax, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
You guys keep being retarded and I'm going to need a Xanax. loving chill out. How many months is it until voting even starts? Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
computer parts posted:Find me a poll that breaks it down by demographics. I'll try. e1: Pew shows consistent polling with Gallup. Here is their demographic breakdown for that favorability poll. e2: Alright, let's also talk about the 2008 exit ABC polls: Hillary had three groups consistently support her in the primaries: women, whites 65+, and the no college vote. Based on policy alone, she'll not win the vote of any low income earners if she gets challenged from the left. Obama and Hillary had very similar healthcare plans and there was even a fiasco over the individual mandate. The black vote will probably be split this time Pohl posted:You need a loving Xanax, too. Xanax cannot fix an impending economic crisis. Anyone who comes into office POTUS will have to deal with one within the next four years. Are you genuinely interested in seeing the bailouts all over again, as they were exactly, seven years ago? Job Truniht fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Jun 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:39
|
|