Bear Retrieval Unit posted:

Who?

Penisaurus Sex posted:

I grew up in the most blood red area of the most blood red state that went for Trump (southern coalfields of WV).

I'll give you a little bit of insight: No one wants to be a loving coal miner in WV. It's poo poo work, your union doesn't have your back half the time (if you're in a union mine), and you're living in fear that you'll lose the one lifeline you have to a middle class life at any point.

Democrats since Carter, including Hillary, can't grasp this fact for some weird reason. You don't have to bring coal back, no one wants it back because it objectively sucks. However, you -do- have to come up with a good way for these people who are here to enjoy a middle class life. That answer is not, as bad as many people want it to be, promising them a free college education. That answer is exactly what Trump did, but you can do it in an honest way.

FistEnergy posted:

Sure. I grabbed most of it from Thundercracker on page 50. Thanks buddy, for getting me to email too.

"To Whom it May Concern:

My name is XXX. I live in XXX. I've been a Democratic voter and supporter for my entire adult life. I donated for both Obama and Clinton, and voted for XXX after voting for XXX in the primary. Until Tuesday night, I considered myself a supporter of Third Way Centralism.

I mention these things to highlight the seriousness of what must be done. The party must make the right choice and back Bernie Sander's pick, Keith Ellison, for the DNC chairman, and let the Sanders wing lead the party. The credibility of establishment Democrats has been utterly destroyed. I call my own judgement into question for not heeding the populist movement that is sweeping the country and reshaping the electorate. Lower income Americans have been forgotten by a Democratic party that used to be their natural ally. We must turn our focus to raising wages for the middle and lower class and strengthening our unions. We must force Wall Street and the top 5% to pay their fair share instead of looting the last remaining wealth of our breadbasket.

If the Democratic Party unites under a common banner and fully embraces the millions of Americans who are struggling and who are fearful for their futures, we can retake our country in 2020 and return dignity, respect, and tolerance to the White House. If we instead fall into an ugly civil war between the centralist and progressive wings of the party, it will spell the end of American liberalism in its entirety.

Please do your part to convince the DNC to make the right choice. The only way out is the way forward, and to embrace the brand of populism that Mr. Sanders harnessed in 2016."

I've already heard back from my county organization and I'll see where it takes me.

TyrantWD posted:

No, personality matters.

Trump could deliver on nothing in his first term other than cut taxes for the rich and remove Wall Street regulations, and he would still carry blue collar white voters by the same margin.

Gene Hackman Fan posted:

I really have to love the petitions circulating around regarding doing away with the electoral college or trying to convince electors to change their vote.

Ain't no way in seven loving hells you're going to be able to convince the opposition to change it when they are totally winning with it. Any petition to electors to be faithless, any petitions to do it popular vote only, is trying to keep yourself busy contemplating your navel while ignoring the humongous sucking chest wound that is the fact that republicans will shortly control both houses, the white house, 69 out of 99 state legislatures, and 35 governorships.

I'm not saying it doesn't suck, but for fucks' sake, could we please concentrate on what would be easier to achieve?

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

Trying to flip EC delegates is literally rigging the electoral process. It's the dumbest loving thing to be doing right now.

Zoran posted:

Irony of ironies, it would have been infinitely easier for the Democrats to defend themselves after 2008 had they just passed free, universal single-payer health care, but too many dumbasses listened to the snakes in Washington who thought that what most Americans could agree with was an arcane market solution that didn't make much sense and wasn't easy to sell

Penisaurus Sex posted:

The one bright spot in this mess is that we can finally quit pretending like 'political capital' is a thing.

Holy gently caress that pissed me off more than anything else about Obama in 2009-10.

Strep Vote posted:

Rigging the process is all Democrats know, apparently.

Penisaurus Sex posted:

I grew up in the most blood red area of the most blood red state that went for Trump (southern coalfields of WV).

I'll give you a little bit of insight: No one wants to be a loving coal miner in WV. It's poo poo work, your union doesn't have your back half the time (if you're in a union mine), and you're living in fear that you'll lose the one lifeline you have to a middle class life at any point.

Democrats since Carter, including Hillary, can't grasp this fact for some weird reason. You don't have to bring coal back, no one wants it back because it objectively sucks. However, you -do- have to come up with a good way for these people who are here to enjoy a middle class life. That answer is not, as bad as many people want it to be, promising them a free college education. That answer is exactly what Trump did, but you can do it in an honest way.

Thoguh posted:

I guess they think the electoral college are basically superdelegates?

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

Al! posted:

more importantly, you can promise to do those things regardless of whether you have the inclination or even ability to do them

MJ12 posted:

Finally, to tie back to #2, there are tons of 'gun control' proposals which can reduce gun violence significantly and do not involve categorical bans of anything, which do not involve shoulder things that go up, and which do not involve anything scary like mass confiscation. Keeping guns away from domestic abusers and felons isn't 'gun control' in the sense that these guys are afraid of. So I think you can change the messaging on this. It's not about taking away guns. (AFAIK the three most effective ones are basically permit-to-purchase, firearms restraints on misdemeanor DV convictions, and regular audits of gun stores, none of which require categorical bans of firearms ownership). This is the sort of 'smart gun law' we should be advocating for. It's not about keeping you, Mr. Law Abiding Citizen, from buying a gun. It's about keeping That Shithead Who Beats His Wife from keeping a gun to shoot his wife with. It's about getting Those Motherfuckers Who Sell Guns To Gang Members And Nobody Cares out of business so gun stores which don't do that poo poo can compete. Permit to Purchase is probably the only one that needs some work to be sold. If you can keep people from being shot to death in greater numbers with a law that doesn't inconvenience gun owners much, why shouldn't we be advocating that? You can win over the gun control demos with the results. And sell it to them via people who actually have lots of experience with guns. The AWB was sold to the public on the backs of a lot of hunters and other gun owners who backed it. Learn from the strategies used on it, but don't get monofocused on trying to make the 1990s happen again.

It's probably not going to make them more inclined to vote for you the same way going full on pro-NRA would, but the idea here is that you want to have something which keeps your pro-gun control base on side while not losing support from gun owners.

hailthefish posted:

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

A GIANT PARSNIP posted:

Also remember that these people still don't have loving healthcare because instead of passing Medicare Part E: Medicare for Everyone, we passed PPACA a - a "complex solution to a complex problem" and we were shocked, Shocked! when the GOP found a loophole in that extremely complex law that allowed them to say gently caress you to giving healthcare to the poorest people who needed that care the most.


loving lol that you posted this just as I was previewing my post.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

TyrantWD posted:

Privatized Medicare and HSAs for everyone! That's what blue collar Americans really need.

lazorexplosion posted:

I thought it was hilarious that the Republicans nominated Trump but goddamn that process seems so good and smart in retrospect. They just put a whole bunch of candidates in the ring and made them fight it out until the best one emerged and when the winning one was completely unorthodox they just went with it and it won because it turned out the unorthodox really was the best idea for the electorate's mood. Anyone thing policy wonks and party insiders could have figured that strategy out? The clean smart simplicity of it all in comparison to the pure goddamn poo poo that was the other side is inspiring.

TyrantWD posted:

What did Trump do other than promise to bring coal and steel back? Retraining people to work in the manufacturing jobs of the future does not appeal to anyone, and that's probably the only way out for these communities. Why do these voters vote so heavily for a Republican party that explicitly runs on all of the things that would hurt their communities even more? It's not like Berniecrats are dominating in rural America.

Gene Hackman Fan posted:

I really have to love the petitions circulating around regarding doing away with the electoral college or trying to convince electors to change their vote.

Ain't no way in seven loving hells you're going to be able to convince the opposition to change it when they are totally winning with it. Any petition to electors to be faithless, any petitions to do it popular vote only, is trying to keep yourself busy contemplating your navel while ignoring the humongous sucking chest wound that is the fact that republicans will shortly control both houses, the white house, 69 out of 99 state legislatures, and 35 governorships.

I'm not saying it doesn't suck, but for fucks' sake, could we please concentrate on what would be easier to achieve?

Penisaurus Sex posted:

The one bright spot in this mess is that we can finally quit pretending like 'political capital' is a thing.

Holy gently caress that pissed me off more than anything else about Obama in 2009-10.

NumberLast posted:

There would be riots and I would join them.

lazorexplosion posted:

I thought it was hilarious that the Republicans nominated Trump but goddamn that process seems so good and smart in retrospect. They just put a whole bunch of candidates in the ring and made them fight it out until the best one emerged and when the winning one was completely unorthodox they just went with it and it won because it turned out the unorthodox really was the best idea for the electorate's mood. Anyone think policy wonks and party insiders could have figured that strategy out? The clean smart simplicity of it all in comparison to the pure goddamn poo poo that was the other side is inspiring.

quote:

The DNC Chair Election: How you can get involved

In the wake of Donald Trump's victory the Democratic Party has been effectively shattered. Hillary Clinton and the machine she built were the presumed heir to leadership but with their disgrace the party is now effectively broken and leaderless.

This shouldn't fill you with despair, it should fill you with hope at the opportunity. Now more than ever is a chance to completely take over the organization from the establishment faction who valued the staid status quo over change, who ignored the economic pain of millions of Americans for technocratic elitism that failed catastrophically at this critical moment in history.

Senator Bernie Sanders has put forward Congressman Keith Ellison and prominent progressive leaders such as Elizabeth Warren have also endorsed him. He is the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which was founded by Senator Sanders in 1991 when he was in a congressman to advocate progressive issues within the democratic party. While many establishment democrats did not take Trump seriously, Congressman Ellison did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHkPadFK34o

However, there is already opposition brewing to this. Former DNC Chair and current pharmaceutical lobbyist Howard Dean has thrown his name in the ring. Former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley has done so as well. Both defended the establishment candidacy of Hillary Clinton during the primary and would not fulfill the radical change the Democratic Party needs to go through to win back the working class and defeat Donald Trump.

We cannot allow this. The establishment must be taken to task.

The bylaws of the DNC (http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/DNC_Charter__Bylaws_9.17.15.pdf) state that

quote:

ARTICLE FIVE
National Chairperson
Section 1. The National Chairperson of the Democratic Party shall carry out the programs and
policies of the National Convention and the Democratic National Committee.
Section 2. The National Chairperson, the five Vice Chairpersons, the National Finance Chair, the Treasurer, and the Secretary, shall be elected:
(a) at a meeting of the Democratic National Committee held after the succeeding presidential election and prior to March 1 next, and,

(b) whenever a vacancy occurs.

The National Chairperson shall be elected and may be
removed by a majority vote of the Democratic National Committee, and each term shall expire upon the election for the following term.

It is not a vote of the party membership but a vote of the committee members, which range from state democratic party chairpersons to the members of various organizations. There are also 200 appointed committee member that are difficult to even find out who they are.

We must mobilize. We must make our voices heard. We must let the elites who have lead us astray know our anger.

I have spent the past few days collecting a list of the contact information of all the DNC committee members I could find. This list is incomplete and may have some wrong information. If it does let me know so I can correct it. But it is a start

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1S7w8tvS0NWA3AX8JdFjZLLAW7f_S4hp2T3416ttjBtg/edit?usp=sharing

E-mail your state chair. Call you state party headquarters. Write letters. Tell your friends. Organize.

Do not let them take this opportunity away from us again.

lazorexplosion posted:

I thought it was hilarious that the Republicans nominated Trump but goddamn that process seems so good and smart in retrospect. They just put a whole bunch of candidates in the ring and made them fight it out until the best one emerged and when the winning one was completely unorthodox they just went with it and it won because it turned out the unorthodox really was the best idea for the electorate's mood. Anyone thing policy wonks and party insiders could have figured that strategy out? The clean smart simplicity of it all in comparison to the pure goddamn poo poo that was the other side is inspiring.

Pathos posted:

Venom Snake -- I posted this ages ago but I really really want as close to a definitive answer as possible: Why did Hillary pick Tim Kaine? Of all people? I get that he's a nice guy but... why? Just why? It was so safe and establishment and loving why?

SirPhoebos posted:

also lol at Venom's analogies in the OP.

You want a WW2 analogy that makes sense? How about Munich 1938. The dems sold out their principles to avoid a bigger disaster...and then the big disaster happened anyway.

Penisaurus Sex posted:

I'm going to give you a little history lesson here: WV, in particular, has been a Democrat stronghold far longer than it has been a Republican one. If you investigate why it flipped, it flipped because the Democrats abandoned labor in the late '60's and early 70's and participated in a bipartisan restructuring of our economy to gently caress over labor.

quote:

No one here is as stupid as people like to think. You can't skirt by on lies and bullshit and seeming inauthentic: Trump won the state, yes, but Bernie crushed Trump's vote numbers compared to each other's primaries and would've turned WV blue in a heartbeat.

NumberLast posted:

Because the Dems don't acknowledge that they exist. We've been over this like a dozen times.

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

They did absolutely everything in their power to not figure it out, even with tens of millions of primary voters screaming it at them.