|
Chantilly Say posted:Yes! My argument is that it's better long-term for him to lose now and create that machinery, than for him to win now and have everyone pin leftist hopes and the rising reputation of leftism on one Presidency with an unusually large array of challenges. Out of curiosity, do your Sander supporter friends believe he'll actually be able to accomplish what he wants to as President?
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:36 |
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:you don't want liebermen? then don't advocate for a 50 state strategy, because that's how you get liebermen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Out of curiosity, do your Sander supporter friends believe he'll actually be able to accomplish what he wants to as President? Yes! Yes, yes, yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Has anyone told Trump about moats and if so what were his opinions on them??/?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:I absolutely disagree, Sanders would be in a much more powerful position to build a left wing movement as President than as the loser. He has decried Obama for abandoning the movement built around him after winning, Sanders would expand and empower his. How, and why? Let me be clear: I think he would be weaker as President for three reasons. He would not be able to enact his agenda. He would face spite-based opposition from within his own party. He would be symbolic of leftism, and blamed for everything that went wrong--therefore, leftism would be blamed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
AllanGordon posted:Has anyone told Trump about moats and if so what were his opinions on them??/? Chantilly Say posted:How, and why? Let me be clear: I think he would be weaker as President for three reasons. He would not be able to enact his agenda. He would face spite-based opposition from within his own party. He would be symbolic of leftism, and blamed for everything that went wrong--therefore, leftism would be blamed. JT Jag fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Al Cowens posted:In 1975, Donald Trump made a bet with George Lucas, that if the Star Wars Saga would still continue even 40 years later, he would pay him 20$. It's 2015 and the latest movie is about to come. There's only one way for Trump to stop it and avoid paying George: That's about $90 when adjusted for inflation. So... still pocket change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Ahahahaha jesus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Trump loves moats, moats are beautiful, one of his hotels has a moat, but moats are killing us I'm not worried about the right here, I'm worried about Democratic voters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
whoa
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
See, the hosed up thing is that I'm pretty sure this is satire. But these people are so loving nuts, I can't actually be sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Hail Satan
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
If Sanders is nominated and wins the general, the "establishment" will be scared of him. He's focusing the anger of the electorate, and the establishment knows this. If you guys haven't caught on yet, focusing the anger of the electorate fed up with politics as usual is literally going to be the theme of this election. You gently caress with Sanders (who now probably has a pretty good organization built up, and is freaking President), you gently caress with your base (who are pissed off at politics as usual, which you just may find yourself fitting into).
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
"DaveWoo" posted:Also, if liberal voters were ready to give up on Obama after only two years, I'd say that's more of a problem with liberal voters than with Obama. If your chosen leaders obtain a solid supermajority where they may pass laws unopposed, then immediately drop all snarky responses, liberal rhetoric, and leftist policy promises in the name of "bipartisanship" after a decade of fingerwagging, and you still vote for that parties' establushment candidates and defend them on the internet, then you are not a liberal or a leftist. You are a Rube. Republicans are winning because even though american conservative response to financial corporatism is tepid, their elected candidates follow through on the promises they care about. Gerrymandering is a large problem. It is neither the only problem nor THE problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:See, the hosed up thing is that I'm pretty sure this is satire. But these people are so loving nuts, I can't actually be sure. I think it's satire. But it's exactly as you say. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Dahbadu posted:I agree here. No it isn't. It is just higher among the people you hang out with and those that make a lot of noise in the online communities you frequent. Obama's grassroots support was absolutely insane. Obama was already pulling 20k people in February a full year before the primariesHave a reminder of what it was like. .
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Dahbadu posted:If Sanders is nominated and wins the general, the "establishment" will be scared of him. He's focusing the anger of the electorate, and the establishment knows this. If you guys haven't caught on yet, focusing the anger of the electorate fed up with politics as usual is literally going to be the theme of this election. You gently caress with Sanders (who now probably has a pretty good organization built up, and is freaking President), you gently caress with your base (who are pissed off at politics as usual, which you just may find yourself fitting into). Why do you want the establishment to be scared? You need them to do jobs, scared people don't work well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Dahbadu posted:If Sanders is nominated and wins the general, the "establishment" will be scared of him. He's focusing the anger of the electorate, and the establishment knows this. If you guys haven't caught on yet, focusing the anger of the electorate fed up with politics as usual is literally going to be the theme of this election. You gently caress with Sanders (who now probably has a pretty good organization built up, and is freaking President), you gently caress with your base (who are pissed off at politics as usual, which you just may find yourself fitting into). The Republicans had their base revolt in 2010. It was astroturfed to hell, but the Tea Party represents a segment of the Republican voting base that feels underrepresented by the GOP Establishment. The Democrats are overdue for their own. Sanders could incite it. Chantilly Say posted:Why do you want the establishment to be scared? You need them to do jobs, scared people don't work well. JT Jag fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Deofuta posted:You ever see Donald Trump campaign up close? He'll go into those high school gymnasiums in Iowa and New Hampshire and blow them all away. He'll shake every hand in the joint, kiss every baby, hug every widow on Social Security, and sound smarter and more honest than any Republican they've ever seen. Because he is. I like how he refuses to shake one guy's hand because he's left-handed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
There needs to be an establishment, whether it's your people or just people you can convince to work with you. You don't scare them, there are too many of them and they're too old for that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Here is what will happen if the anti-gerrymandering establishment candidates achieveva supermajority: "W-w-we uh, would like to estu-er, establish a bipartisan agreement with the racist jackasses across the table in the name of american solidarity, and to avoid abusing our power (that you gave us, because you agreed with our rhetoric, and had no interest in the opposite party)."
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:There needs to be an establishment, whether it's your people or just people you can convince to work with you. You don't scare them, there are too many of them and they're too old for that poo poo. the status quo is unsustainable, senpai
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:There needs to be an establishment, whether it's your people or just people you can convince to work with you. You don't scare them, there are too many of them and they're too old for that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
AllanGordon posted:Has anyone told Trump about moats and if so what were his opinions on them??/? We could dig a big ditch and fill it with water. That would stop people from crossing the border for sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:If your chosen leaders obtain a solid supermajority where they may pass laws unopposed, then immediately drop all snarky responses, liberal rhetoric, and leftist policy promises in the name of "bipartisanship" after a decade of fingerwagging, and you still vote for that parties' establushment candidates and defend them on the internet, then you are not a liberal or a leftist. You are a Rube. The super majority the democrats had in the Senate was probably one of the weakest ever. It lasted only ~9 months and Leiberman essentially became dictator of democratic policy. He alone held up Obamacare long enough to almost kill it. Trying to blame Obama for not using that 9 months more wisely is a bit stupid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Sounds like a job for Bobby Jindal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
stoutfish posted:the status quo is unsustainable, senpai Yes! I agree! That's why I am against things that I think will sustain it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Tercio posted:I think it's satire. But it's exactly as you say. He scrubbed the Duggar endorsement from his campaign site so I doubt he'll be defending him this time
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Donald Trump is inarguably a nationalist, and more socialist than other Republican candidates.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:I absolutely disagree, Sanders would be in a much more powerful position to build a left wing movement as President than as the loser. He has decried Obama for abandoning the movement built around him after winning, Sanders would expand and empower his. The GOP will have the house until at least 2020 at a minimum and likely the senate until 2020 (probably longer on both with a democratic president). The first four years of a 2016 democratic president is going to be like the last 4 years of Obama's presidency. Nothing will get done. And odds are that the economy will start declining in those years after it's been growing for so many years straight. And it's laughable to assume that Sanders could win in 2016. He's not Obama for multiple reasons, his campaign isn't like Obama's was and he's not presidential. He has a fraction of the excitement and support that Obama had. He'd look like an unstable old man up on the debate stage. The results would be similar to the 72 or 84 elections. That kind of wave election would set leftism further back. Assuming that the lottery hit for Sanders and he won; the upcoming 2018 elections would be a bloodbath for democrats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:Yes! I agree! That's why I am against things that I think will sustain it. hoping that bernie doesn't win the presidency, is in line with the status quo
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Donald Trump is inarguably a nationalist, and more socialist than other Republican candidates. I'm very much thinking hard about this, and I got nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
donald trump is a national socialist
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:The GOP will have the house until at least 2020 at a minimum and likely the senate until 2020 (probably longer on both with a democratic president). The first four years of a 2016 democratic president is going to be like the last 4 years of Obama's presidency. Nothing will get done. And odds are that the economy will start declining in those years after it's been growing for so many years straight. Mitt Romney posted:The super majority the democrats had in the Senate was probably one of the weakest ever. It lasted only ~9 months and Leiberman essentially became dictator of democratic policy. He alone held up Obamacare long enough to almost kill it. Trying to blame Obama for not using that 9 months more wisely is a bit stupid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:In his first term Obama turned his back on his base during the various attempts to compromise with the Republicans, putting up a number of things that were thought to be sacrosanct on the table. They even went so far as to basically say "governing is a serious job for serious people, I'm not worried about the base, they'll just have to deal with it." You want a Tea Party-style surge within the Democratic party? Great. Where are your House and Senate candidates? JT Jag posted:Thank you for your input, forums poster Mitt Romney. He's not wrong. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:-therefore, leftism would be blamed. It is already blamed, quite heavily, and at least as often by Democrats as by Republicans. FFS Democrats still blame Nader for 2000, even though more Democrats voted for Bush than all of Nader's votes combined. That isn't a mistake or an unfortunate bout of stupidity: it's because most democrats are miserable milquetoast center-right idiots casting about to blame anyone but their tepid Republican-lite candidates and themselves for the inability to win consistently. The magickal thinking here, where it exists, is that there is any more than about 15%-20% of registered voters who are actually "leftist" in any meaningful sense of the word. Some Sanders supporters have a mistaken notion of some Silent Liberal Majority that is simply oppressed by the weight of control and money in the senior ranks. Most (I hope) of us aren't that deluded.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
stoutfish posted:donald trump is So is Bernie Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:36 |
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Jeb defends his use of the term "anchor babies": Remember a few pages back where someone was saying Jeb? could get 40% of the hispanic vote? Good times. At this point I seriously doubt he'll be the nominee. He seems to have no political instinct whatsoever. How'd he ever get elected governor?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:59
|
|