|
Christie drat well better finish drinking his milk.   
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 11:37 |
|
|
Sonofsilversign posted:Why do people care so much about Bernie supporters not voting for HIllary? Its not as though she will have a strong R candidate to contend with. Barring 2000/2008 style corruption/voter suppression she should easily win without the Actual Progressive voters. Why are we just pretending that 2000/2008 style corruption/voter suppression isn't going to happen? The VRA is on life support and voter suppression is in high gear. Nietzschean posted:You are proposing that a Leftist analog of the Tea Party threaten to unseat incumbent Democrats? No, according to his argument you can't change the party from within. Clearly the Tea Party has been ineffective, because for a short period of time 3rd parties had some success in changing the two big parties in the early part of the last century.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Christie drat well better finish drinking his milk. "Mtn. Dew Cake" 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:14
|
|
|
Drastic Actions posted:"Mtn. Dew Cake" 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
Drastic Actions posted:"Mtn. Dew Cake" This only reverse the smiley
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:This is just plain wrong. The most effective way to change one of the two parties is through successful third party movements. The populists, the progressives, the socialist party/labor movement, the dixiecrats, all had their planks adopted (some in a watered down form) by one of the two major parties after they robbed a party of an election. Almost every major ideological shift of the Republicans and Democrats has been caused by a third party revolt. All of which also involved more than merely a quixotic third party run for president.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JSBhI_0at0 history has proven that thesis wrong
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:33
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:It is kind of amazing how people having managed to take the most left wing and progressive candidate to run for President with any actual support in decades, who is running against an architect of the New Democrats third wayism, and make it so that supporting him is the bigoted, anti-minority and anti-women vote. democrats.txt
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:45
|
|
|
Drastic Actions posted:"Mtn. Dew Cake" It's basically lemon cake and instant pudding with a can of mountain dew poured into the batter. Not sure if that's better or worse than what you were imagining.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:also the people accusing me of demanding ideological purity are not getting what I'm saying at all - I'm saying that if you want actual progressive policy to be pushed by the Democratic Party that's not just the mildest of reforms, you need a real threat of a third party revolt of the left. As long as they are content they will continue the path of New Democrat neoliberalism. This is not a demand for purity, this is 100% practical. why didn't they figure out that ideollogically PURE~ was meant to be sarcastic and mocking? Agree about practicality. It's not an either/or matter. There are some things you will disagree about on a particular platform with some politicians, I don't agree with everything with Bernie but I agree with a hell of a lot more on his platform than any other candidate and that is just sad. Nobody is perfect, but you have to try to appeal to rationale instead of emotions. Republicans are very good at appealing to emotions, so hate and bigotry is a strong platform for them and that is not cool. With appealing to rationale, you basically are being practical. So if Bernie goes down fighting, I am cool and okay with that because I know I tried and we really truly deserve the world we get~ It's not a matter of pride, it's a matter of do I want a dystopian cyberpunk post-America?...actually wait, I'm gonna vote GOP for that nvm...  just 4 more years and we'll see Blade Runner Los Angeles, can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
This thread sucks now. Post more funny poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:This thread sucks now. Post more funny poo poo.  Especially now that we have a separate Hillary/Bernie RAHOWA thread
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:13
|
|
|
I'm going to defend Scott Walker. American without is a perfectly valid cheesesteak order. Media is dumb. He does sniff his own poop though. http://bit.ly/1Iqh3OA
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
do what you want for the top of the ticket, but please show up to vote for downballot stuff, peace and god bless madisonian democracy
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
LuciferMorningstar posted:Abstention can absolutely be a viable strategy, but I do agree that staying home is probably inferior to something like a protest vote. The problem is that multiple conditions have to be met in order for the establishment to actually take note and react in the desired fashion. Where national politics is concerned, I figure the two primary conditions that would have to be met are 1) that enough individuals protest vote/abstain (loudly) to demonstrate that the election results are not just a product of voter suppression or apathy, and 2) that there are enough individuals participating to make it clear that the party can't attract voters from another ideological leaning by going in a direction that is not desired by the protesters. The problem with achieving (1) is that voter turnout is a pretty obvious problem in the US, so a small movement could easily go unnoticed or disregarded. This is especially true if a party could make up for the protest-vote loss by putting more into GOTV efforts. The problem with (2) is that, as you previously pointed out, it's totally plausible that the Democrats could snipe some moderate Republicans by moving to the right, which leaves the protesting leftists even more sidelined than they previously were. Thus, I can only conclude that protest voting at the national level will probably not work (in the context of not voting because Bernie didn't get the nomination), even if it has theoretical plausibility. The Latinos are actually a proof of why the loving retarded idea that you need to make them fear you to get their help has no basis. Democrats support the DREAM act. Do they do it because Latino voters started threatening them publicly? Or do they do it because the Latino base proved how great a member of the big tent it was and swayed everyone to its side? Make. Allies. Not. Enemies. How is it that the only people who can't get this are the ones who need to learn it more than anyone?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
For everyone suggesting a third party candidate hamstringing the party in the general, isn't that what Nader did in 2000, and didn't that just push the Democratic party further to the center? I don't see what losing to what is no doubt going to be a radical Republican is going to do other than insure the things ruining our system, like citizens united, stay in place and get new lovely laws to accompany it. We do this to ourselves every time we get in power. We don't show up to midterms and we make protest votes in the general and then we're surprised that Republican and conservative shitheads have been in charge for the majority of the last six decades. Losing elections to conservatives does not do what you think it does. We have lost enough times to low turnout to know that by now. Losing elections pushes the left to the center, because getting a seat at the table is more important than maintaining ideological purity. Citizens united, gerrymandering, the drug war, and a great deal of other major issues could come up in the next eight years that will change the political landscape in this country forever. If you want to take a stand and get the party to re-embrace socialism, you need to get us in power for a few election cycles first so the far left has a leg to stand on first. Two to four conservative supreme court justices would be a disaster right now. It would ruin the country for socialist ideals, possibly forever. We saw the same arguments from the Nader camp in 2000, and the same from the people who decided not to vote in 2004 because they didn't think Kerry was good enough. The eight years of bush we got destroyed the last vestiges of socialism in the party for the following decade, not to mention throwing us into the worst recession in 80+ years and two failed wars that set back stability in the Middle East by decades. Vote for Bernie in the primary. Hope he wins. But if he doesn't and you choose to abstain, you have no right to call yourself a progressive or a leftist. You're just a spite voter. Mirthless fucked around with this message at 14:49 on Jul 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:I'm going to defend Scott Walker. American without is a perfectly valid cheesesteak order. Media is dumb. This is true. I'm usually an American With guy myself, but some people just don't like onions and that's ok.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:True story: the only reason the Second New Deal happened is because Huey Long intended to run as president from the left and FDR had to outmaneuver him. Did you miss the post saying that a third party threat tactic seems to only work when one party is dominant? In your Vermont example, as another posted pointed out, the Deomcratic party had a strong hold on things, which allowed for a third party challenge that didn't just gently caress everything up and give it to Republicans. Want to guess the margins on FDR's victory in 1932? 472 electoral votes to 59.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
Will you sanctimonious dweebs please take the Demchat to the other thread?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
Nope. We're in some lovely subforum now, you aren't even a mod, gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:This thread sucks now. Post more funny poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
Deez Nuts would still probably poll better than Jindal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Will you sanctimonious dweebs please take the Demchat to the other thread? go ahead, the floor is open, shift the topic? find anything relevant and cool to share? no? okay, complain away. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
Here are 100 reasons that the Republicans and Democrats are the same. I saw this posted on Facebook as to why people should support Donald Trump but it works for in this thread as to why you should support Bernie (which I will in the primary season) http://ivn.us/2012/11/06/100-ways-republicans-are-just-like-democrats/
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Will Deez Nuts make it on the ballot? I'm worried their support may cool off and shrivel up before the general erection.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Gamma Nerd posted:Keystone XL. Supporting the oil industry undoes all the effects of her climate plan. 33% of electricity being renewable by 2030 is also not nearly enough mobilization to prevent a catastrophic outcome. The pipeline doesn't increase oil usage, so it's weird to see you claiming it would "undo the effects of the energy plan". Also you're pretty loopy if you think anyone can deliver better than 33% renewable in 3 years from inauguration (hell it sounds way too optimistic at 33%!). hosed up, but true.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Well it's over. The Trump train has come to the end of the tracks. The Koch brothers are freezing him out, no way he can win now. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/kochs-freeze-out-trump-120752.html This is just like Harry potter not getting the inviso cloth thingy, there is no way he can complete the quest in the next movie now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The pipeline doesn't increase oil usage, so it's weird to see you claiming it would "undo the effects of the energy plan". Also you're pretty loopy if you think anyone can deliver better than 33% renewable in 3 years from inauguration (hell it sounds way too optimistic at 33%!). Not to mention there are already literally hundreds of these things across the country. It's not like they're going to stop building pipelines if keystone doesn't go through, and if anything, they will probably end up building more. Dahn posted:Well it's over. Are you kidding me? Now The Donald can accuse his opponents of crony capitalism with a straight face. With the Kochs withdrawing support, Trump can safely skewer both his opponents and the Kochs and come out as even more of a populist outsider. He's already got plenty of money, and bizarrely, grass roots support. I don't see how this doesn't help him. Edit: also, if this emboldens GOP leadership to stand up to Trump, this could be exactly the scenario that leads to a third party run for him. I don't see it having the effect the Kochs are hoping for - Donald Trump is not a politician. Mirthless fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Jul 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Dahn posted:Well it's over. My prediction continues to be proven. By the time the first votes are actually cast, every rear end-hole in the world will be against Trump, making him highly appealing. We can just add the Kochs to the list today along with Clinton, Preibus, Rove, El Chapo, etc., etc., etc.......
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Dahn posted:Well it's over. The Donald deserves the nomination for that alone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Good night sweet prince. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:I'm going to defend Scott Walker. American without is a perfectly valid cheesesteak order. Media is dumb. Remember when John Kerry ordered Swiss cheese for his cheesesteak? Lol Scott Walker: more competent than Kerry
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Quote of the morning, “I have seen pictures from them and obviously find them disturbing. Planned Parenthood is answering questions and will continue to answer questions. I think there are two points to make. One, Planned Parenthood for more than a century has done a lot of really good work for women: cancer screenings, family planning, all kinds of health services. And this raises not questions about Planned Parenthood so much as it raises questions about the whole process, that is, not just involving Planned Parenthood, but many institutions in our country.” ~ Hillary Clinton Lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Man which candidate died last night for all these posts?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
DOOP posted:Remember when John Kerry ordered Swiss cheese for his cheesesteak? Lol The first cheese steak was probably made w provolone and the switch to American/Whiz was due to food costs and nothing else. Swiss is fine on a philly, esp with onion and mushrooms. The way the steak is prepared and the bread it's served on are way more important than the cheese.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:The first cheese steak was probably made w provolone and the switch to American/Whiz was due to food costs and nothing else. Swiss is fine on a philly, esp with onion and mushrooms. The way the steak is prepared and the bread it's served on are way more important than the cheese. For normal people yes, for politicians trying to get in votes in philly, it's cheese whiz or bust.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
The Hillary vs Sanders Eternal Holy War Quarantine
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:For normal people yes, for politicians trying to get in votes in philly, it's cheese whiz or bust. Fair enough. I guess being high falootin with his cheese probably didn't help his image as an out of touch elitist, but it's not like mushroom and swiss wasnt a poo poo hit combo in 2004. Dude got a bad rap just for eating what he likes. Walker wasting that sandwich can just gently caress off though, if he wasn't hungry he should have just bought sandwiches for the crowd.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 11:37 |
|
|
Make me post there. Do it. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:35
|
|