|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:As Greg Sargent so aptly put it this morning: "so yes, Democrats are wringing their hands about HIllary Clinton, but they wouldn't be Democrats if they weren't." In 2008 weren't we all rotating between convincing ourselves that Obama v Clinton was strengthening Obama for the general, and Arzying about how Clinton was loving everyone by not dropping out?
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 06:28 |
|
|
Kro-Bar posted:SCOTUS punted the contraceptive mandate back to the lower courts. Ugh. It would inevitably be a 4-4 clusterfuck if they ruled on it right now, stalling seems to be the prudent option.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Gyges posted:In 2008 weren't we all rotating between convincing ourselves that Obama v Clinton was strengthening Obama for the general, and Arzying about how Clinton was loving everyone by not dropping out? That was before I posted on SA but was active at DKos and yes, that was pretty much the Democrat baseline position. Worrying that by nominating John McCain, people would fall for his "I am maverick, moderate" bullshit and we'd be stuck with Bush III
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:I'm going to take a different tact and ask what you would like to see different about the Democrats to vote for them. I have my own critiques but maybe they're different. A lot of issues, but mainly I'd like to a party have a strong stance against endless wars. Hillary certainly isn't getting my vote. My partner is from Libya and we had the recent 'joy' of watching her reckless policies completely destroy the country so it'll take a lot to convince me.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:A lot of issues, but mainly I'd like to a party have a strong stance against endless wars. Hillary certainly isn't getting my vote. My partner is from Libya and we had the recent 'joy' of watching her reckless policies completely destroy the country so it'll take a lot to convince me. You know the Secretary of State doesn't set the US Foreign Policy on their own? They carry out administration policy, which is crafted from a variety of sources.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:It would inevitably be a 4-4 clusterfuck if they ruled on it right now, stalling seems to be the prudent option. True, but it's still disappointing.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You know the Secretary of State doesn't set the US Foreign Policy on their own? True, but HIllary's views are pretty drat hawkish. I still prefer her any day to anything the Republicans can throw up though and feel that Libya was hosed one way or another once a rebellion began in earnest.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
I heard an interesting quote from a radio show that really says how i and others feel, Saying that Ted Cruz people are being pressured or guilted into voting for trump and they say they wont because "You are assuming that trump (clinton) had my vote to begin with and lost it at some point, which is not the case". There is absolutely no chance i'll vote for clinton, and that pains me because i've reliably pulled [D] since i was 18. I wouldnt do it at gunpoint. I think many clinton folks are too hopped up on drinking the "Its not a white male!" kool-aid and just assume that all other liberal voters either feel the same way, or were TRICKED by evil white male bernie into not supporting clinton.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You know the Secretary of State doesn't set the US Foreign Policy on their own? They carry out administration policy, which is crafted from a variety of sources. Are you saying that Clinton disagreed with those policies?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
If you support Democratic causes, you should vote for Hillary. It's pretty selfish and shortsighted to do otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Mozi posted:If you support Democratic causes, you should vote for Hillary. It's pretty selfish and shortsighted to do otherwise. Depends what you mean by "Democratic Causes". The democratic party of 10 years ago is not the democratic party of today.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-moderate-democrats-223168 Continue the Arzying!!! quote:As Democrats portray Donald Trump as a dangerous leader for his party, most of them barely acknowledge he could be president. But some centrist Democrats say they’re ready and willing to work with the business mogul should he defeat their party’s nominee.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Depends what you mean by "Democratic Causes". The democratic party of 10 years ago is not the democratic party of today. please elaborate on the specific ways in which you feel this is true
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
E mm
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Depends what you mean by "Democratic Causes". The democratic party of 10 years ago is not the democratic party of today. All those minorities. *shakes head*
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Depends what you mean by "Democratic Causes". The democratic party of 10 years ago is not the democratic party of today. You should vote for her based on potential Supreme Court appointments alone. Also look who she's running against.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Friendly reminder that every vote you don't use to support the D supports The Trump and all the poo poo head ideas that come up on right wing radio. Seriously you people really should pick the hills you die on more carefully. Your vote matters, your symbolic yet impotent political statement does not.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:There is absolutely no chance i'll vote for clinton, and that pains me because i've reliably pulled [D] since i was 18. I wouldnt do it at gunpoint. I think many clinton folks are too hopped up on drinking the "Its not a white male!" kool-aid and just assume that all other liberal voters either feel the same way, or were TRICKED by evil white male bernie into not supporting clinton. Great, no one cares, she will be President without your vote. It's amazing how much we delude ourselves into thinking votes for the top of the ticket carry any sort of statistical significance.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Mozi posted:If you support Democratic causes, you should vote for Hillary. It's pretty selfish and shortsighted to do otherwise. I don't think there's anything wrong with voting your conscience. If you're a one issue voter and that issue is opposition to America's wars then neither Clinton nor Trump are good candidates to vote for.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Gorelab posted:True, but HIllary's views are pretty drat hawkish. I still prefer her any day to anything the Republicans can throw up though and feel that Libya was hosed one way or another once a rebellion began in earnest. There was a pretty balanced piece on Vox about this a few weeks ago. Basically the thing is because she's been involved in actual US Foreign Policy decisions, unlike anyone else in the field, she has the baggage of actually having to support the things you have to support when you're in power -- but she also has a very long record of diplomatic intervention over military intervention. It's not to say she's a dove, but essentially that dove/hawk is a kind of meaningless binary. botany posted:Are you saying that Clinton disagreed with those policies? I am saying calling it her policies is a bit misleading. It also fails to understand why Libya ended up being such a cluster gently caress after the initial intervention, some of which is a result of things that happened after she left State. MattD1zzl3 posted:I heard an interesting quote from a radio show that really says how i and others feel, Saying that Ted Cruz people are being pressured or guilted into voting for trump and they say they wont because "You are assuming that trump (clinton) had my vote to begin with and lost it at some point, which is not the case". You're also a moron, so...
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:Friendly reminder that every vote you don't use to support the D supports The Trump and all the poo poo head ideas that come up on right wing radio. * Offer only valid in some states.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Refresh my memory, but did Jeb Bush actually say "[something], boy, I don't know" during the primaries because it came up in the West Wing and now I can't tell if I just hallucinated Jeb saying it IRL. Kasich said like "This is just nuts, jeez, oh man" in a debate in reference to the slapfight between Trump and everyone else. At some event, Bush said "stuff happens" in response to another school shooting. You might have been thinking of that since the original was "Crime, oh boy, I don't know."
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
botany posted:I don't think there's anything wrong with voting your conscience. If you're a one issue voter and that issue is opposition to America's wars then neither Clinton nor Trump are good candidates to vote for. I'm just gonna say it, one issue voters are all morons.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You know the Secretary of State doesn't set the US Foreign Policy on their own? They carry out administration policy, which is crafted from a variety of sources. Yep. But Clinton is very openly hawkish and strongly pursued the NATO bombing of Libya. Gorelab posted:True, but HIllary's views are pretty drat hawkish. I still prefer her any day to anything the Republicans can throw up though and feel that Libya was hosed one way or another once a rebellion began in earnest. Libya was already hosed up. Gaddafi tortured and raped teenage girls among other things. ISIS beheadings and civil war aren't any better. It's not easy to convince someone to vote for the person that pushed for bombing your childhood home.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-moderate-democrats-223168 God dammit. Smells like 2001-2008 all over again. It's like they've learned nothing about Republicans from the entirety of the Obama administration.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:My partner is from Libya and we had the recent 'joy' of watching her reckless policies completely destroy the country so it'll take a lot to convince me. I know that we took the logistical lead on that operation, but you realize that Europe, the UN, and the Arab League all were participating or signed off on it, right? I mean, what would you be saying right now if we'd just stood back and let Gaddafi burn down Benghazi?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I'm just gonna say it, one issue voters are all morons. I mean I don't think being a one issue voter is great either, but if e.g. you have Iraki roots and were forced to see your country bombed to poo poo then I'm not going to hold it against you if you care about foreign policy more than anything else.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:Yep. But Clinton is very openly hawkish and strongly pursued the NATO bombing of Libya. She's also very openly a proponent of diplomatic engagement as the first option.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:Yep. But Clinton is very openly hawkish and strongly pursued the NATO bombing of Libya. She didn't 'push' for it, she wanted it on the table, but the main hawk voices were actually France who wanted full on invasion poo poo going down.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Stop doing bad things! No! Oh well, we tried. Moral victories are our only victories.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:She's also very openly a proponent of diplomatic engagement as the first option. Politicians say a lot of things. It doesn't change what they've actually done. I'm not a single-issue voter, I was just talking about one of the major issues I care about. My vote doesn't matter anyway as my state will go blue in the general election. botany posted:I mean I don't think being a one issue voter is great either, but if e.g. you have Iraki roots and were forced to see your country bombed to poo poo then I'm not going to hold it against you if you care about foreign policy more than anything else. This basically. If you bomb people, then expect to have 'single issue' voters.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:All those minorities. *shakes head* Hey, if Romney can weep over it, so can we!
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:Politicians say a lot of things. It doesn't change what they've actually done. She led the last major talks between leaders of Israel and Palestine and initiated the negotiations for the Iran deal -- both of which were ideas she supported.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Stop doing bad things! Unless someone else in charge bombed people before, in which case we don't even have moral victories due to some perpetual metaphysical taint.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:You should vote for her based on potential Supreme Court appointments alone. Also look who she's running against. Trump would nominate a bunch of Souters.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I'm just gonna say it, one issue voters are all morons. Not sure what's so bad about 'one issue'. What does that even mean? Some of the top issues I care about : - Bombing everybody (hyperbole I know, but we do bomb a lot of different people) - Climate change. Neither Dems or Republicans take this seriously at all (at least Democrats acknowledge that it exists as a platform) - Domestic financial policy. I think Bernie has really brought this to the forefront this election, which is good I guess. - Single payer healthcare. I also am not a member of any particular party because they're all awful. You'd think with those 3 things I'd be a green, but they also have crazy poo poo like: - Ban use of GMO food 'until more research is done'. - Single-payer healthcare.... for homeopathic medicine. - Shut down all nuclear reactors immediately. Any one of those positions makes me not interested in supporting that party. Is that single-issue?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Wow she engages Trump's attacks all over the place. She's raring to go, it's honestly when she comes across as most sincere. IMO Clinton looks her best when she's an annoyed technocrat enduring waves of blistering stupidity.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
AbsoluteLlama posted:Not sure what's so bad about 'one issue'. What does that even mean? no, it's when you claim to vote based on one issue and only one issue. like if for some reason you would have to vote for repub pres/dem senate/repub house/dem local senate/repub local house in order to only vote for anti-gun-control candidates what you have is just unrealistic expectations, not that that is necessarily bad
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 06:28 |
|
|
I'm asking what people object to with Democrats not because I'm seeking out wrong thought but because I want to know what things are plausible to add and purge to the party platform or what are the most likely candidates for a 2nd party resurgence if and when the Republicans collapse in on themselves. Llama's anti war feelings is not something that I was immediately considering and is useful and allows development of.some ideas on how to talk to voters to encourage that stance like "No American Blood and Treasure for robber barons!"
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:53
|
|
