|
your thread is bad though people keep coming here because of how bad it is you should work on improving your thread if you want people to post there which would also make me happy, because then this thread would stay on topic more
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
Mr. Horrible posted:your thread is bad though 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:Counterpoint: you suck Mr. Horrible's pretty rad actually while i agree it would be nice to stay on topic and not get into stupid drama, i understand the frustration w/having to deal with a thread that's filled with drama instead problem is, if you try to post about drama-prone stuff here, you'll just make this thread just as volatile
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
I always assumed that each thread is populated with people of likeminded ideology. All of the left wing posters post in this thread, while center left posters post in another. If someone from either group cross threads, they will likely be uncomfortable as the entire thread will attack their opinion due to deviating from the norm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:People can make other threads too nonsense only the government can do that for me 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
So, in the interest of dragging things away from the Bernie v. Hillary holy war, who's looking good for a 2020 presidential run? I know this thread is traditionally focused on the legislative branch, which is a good and cool place to focus, but I'm curious. I don't see Bernie running again, and Elizabeth Warren doesn't seem interested in the job. I've heard Feingold's name mentioned. Anyone else? Of course we all know it's gonna be Kanye running in both parties simultaneously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
It will probably be Hillary Clinton, any speculation beyond that seems kind of pointless until after this election
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:People can make other threads too Can we have another Sanders thread? It'll get cultish and spammy but no one who isn't already itching to start poo poo will care.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Goetta posted:It will probably be Hillary Clinton, any speculation beyond that seems kind of pointless until after this election If Hillary wins I don't see anyone serious on the left primarying her in 2020 - unless she fucks up something big.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:If Hillary wins I don't see anyone serious on the left primarying her in 2020 - unless she fucks up something big. Pretty much nothing but impeachment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
And I fully expect Hillary's entire time in office to be plagued with constant attempts at impeachment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
I just want to see a Hillary/Kanye debate Please make this happen
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Breadallelogram posted:And I fully expect Hillary's entire time in office to be plagued with constant attempts at impeachment. I have it on good authority that she can work with republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
It's very difficult these days to predict potential candidates 8 or even at times 4 years in the future. Plenty of rising stars fall while plenty of nobodies shoot up in popularity. Remember Julian Castro?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:Counterpoint: you suck the frequency with which you post in the bad thread is a leading contributor to its badness
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
docbeard posted:Feingold
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Someone wrote a good thread on organizing over on the tweetbox: https://twitter.com/prisonculture/status/751055069630623744 It might not resonate with everyone since it's coming from an implicitly anarchist angle, but I found it interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
if Jeb had just taken a shot of 5 hour energy every morning he'd be the gop nominee right now
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Mr. Horrible posted:your thread is bad though i can only assume your definition of improvement is "kick out everybody with differing opinions" which is a nope there's nothing wrong with this thread when it stays on topic but if it becomes a whine zone for people wishing they could have their sanders thread back then it's gonna get roughed up in the back alleyway
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Disagreement is fine but every time I click on a thread it is half filled with the most joyless unfunny posters on earth so why bother
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
logikv9 posted:i can only assume your definition of improvement is "kick out everybody with differing opinions" which is a nope Does "on topic" mean the name Bernie Sanders is forbidden? He's relevant to the discussion and I think my post yesterday about house dems booing him was relevant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Breadallelogram posted:Does "on topic" mean the name Bernie Sanders is forbidden? He's relevant to the discussion and I think my post yesterday about house dems booing him was relevant. imo on topic is basically anything to do with progressive downticket candidates (either mentioned in the OP or not) and progressive political positions in general. so there was plenty of posting during the platform negotiations about how democrats want this and that but the progressive position is something else, and therefore democrats are dead. that's cool and fine. for bernie, especially that post in particular it would really belong in the YCSed thread. often it's hard to separate him from whatever progressive political positions discussed ITT because he is the most visible progressive politician, but i'd rather keep him there anyway. if you start talking about him here en masse, then "his side" becomes holed up in this thread. this has the effect of both 1) loving over the actual point of both threads, because berniechat would eclipse all ITT and the dead candidate thread would become the dead candidate minus bernie for special reasons thread, and 2) creating two echochambers, one here and one in the YCSed thread with some crossshitposting in between. what i'm trying to say is that thread tribalism is weird and bad
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
logikv9 posted:imo on topic is basically anything to do with progressive downticket candidates (either mentioned in the OP or not) and progressive political positions in general. so there was plenty of posting during the platform negotiations about how democrats want this and that but the progressive position is something else, and therefore democrats are dead. that's cool and fine. Okay thanks for elaborating.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Goetta posted:Disagreement is fine but every time I click on a thread it is half filled with the most joyless unfunny posters on earth so why bother
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Watching democrats boo Bernie is pretty telling. I wonder if incidents like that will influence his decisions in the coming weeks wrt endorsing Hillary and such. To me at least it highlights that trying to have a progressive 'revolution' inside the democratic party is pretty much pointless and useless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
You guys should be nicer to Zen Death Robot. He is the only admin to actually tred these muddy waters and properly moderate. I doubt any of us could properly moderate this sub-forum.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
ZDR is cool IMO
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Breadallelogram posted:ZDR is cool IMO Unlike certain other mods, he isn't biased. He slams down on fervent Bernie and Hillary supporters equally.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
He can slam down on me anytime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
I don't agree at all with ZDR title. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
ZDR is the only competent admin the forums has ever had.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
ZDR would be fine if he didn't melt down so much/didn't have such a fragile ego. He's not worthy to wield
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Reason posted:Watching democrats boo Bernie is pretty telling. I wonder if incidents like that will influence his decisions in the coming weeks wrt endorsing Hillary and such. To me at least it highlights that trying to have a progressive 'revolution' inside the democratic party is pretty much pointless and useless. considering the leaks about his endorsement coming tuesday came after he got boo'd I doubt it
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
Poster known for inaccurate assumptions and poor reading comprehension read something and makes assumption.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:Poster known for inaccurate assumptions and poor reading comprehension read something and makes assumption. CSPAM.txt
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/751515589097717760
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Haha  , that choice of picture
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Did the police send in a bomb squad robot to essentially bomb a person? That seems pretty hosed up. Thought the police/swat/other agents had access to things like flashbangs, teargas, smoke grenades, etc... E: relevant to topic because police reform is a progressive platform issue Corky Romanovsky has issued a correction as of 00:47 on Jul 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:Did the police send in a bomb squad robot to essentially bomb a person? That seems pretty hosed up. I didn't even think of that at first until I started seeing comments about incapacitating rather than killing the guy. I expect the incoming centrists to equivocate to feign a middle ground while pushing for more "blue lives matter" styled legislation because they agree much more with republicans than anyone to the left of them that a cop's power is sacrosanct and comes before the rights of the filthy poors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
empireofcrime posted:I didn't even think of that at first until I started seeing comments about incapacitating rather than killing the guy. I expect the incoming centrists to equivocate to feign a middle ground while pushing for more "blue lives matter" styled legislation because they agree much more with republicans than anyone to the left of them that a cop's power is sacrosanct and comes before the rights of the filthy poors. well jarmak is a clinton supporter 
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:47
|
|
