|
I don't want to put minority issues on the backburner. If you do, i want nothing to do with you nor your candidates. The rust belt isn't as racist as you think.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I still say the answer is to cultivate, nurture, run, and highlight candidates who are POC, LGBT, and women. That closed primaries skew the polls?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
Serious question do you guys have opinions on my hypothesis? White progressives, do you feel like people like Kamala Harris and Keith Ellison could lead a Bernie-style progressive movement effectively and reach out to the rural and working white poor? Minority posters, do you feel that you would be less afraid if the faces of progressivism were overwhelmingly minorities? I feel like if we could find qualified people it would do us good to have more minority candidates. If we claim to be the party of minorities we should be represented by them outside of the most inner city.Agnosticnixie posted:That closed primaries skew the polls? If the lesson people take from the 2016 primary was "it was rigged" and not "progressives need to invade and take over and reshape the party well before the election, not show up a year out and expect to be handed the keys," we're not going to get anywhere. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 07:48 on Nov 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:46
|
|
|
It would help if there was a way to organize the working class outside of electoral politics. Like BLM did for race issues and so on. This used to unions and maybe it could be again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
So this article seems to debunk the whole " not enough people went out and voted" http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/11/did_clinton_fail_to_turn_out_registered_democrats.html quote:Nate Cohn of the New York Times estimates that when every vote is tallied, some 63.4 million Americans will have voted for Clinton and 61.2 million for Trump. That means Clinton will have turned out more supporters than any presidential candidate in history except for Obama in 2008 and 2012. And as David Wasserman of Cook Political Report notes, the total vote count—including third-party votes—has already crossed 127 million, and will “easily beat” the 129 million total from 2012. The idea that voters stayed home in 2016 because they hated Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton is a myth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I still say the answer is to cultivate, nurture, run, and highlight candidates who are POC, LGBT, and women. Jewish doesn't count as white does it
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
Xae posted:Single Payer is one of those issues that polls really well when you talk about it vaguely. Democrats refused to support it and ran hitpieces against it seems like a good reason why it failed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
Fansy posted:Jewish doesn't count as white does it I don't feel qualified to answer this but from the perspective of a poor black person from the inner city? Probably.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:Yeah, it's entirely possible to do the Bernie thing while also heavily advocating for issues affecting minorities, but you have to emphasize the latter because white progressives have a long history of loving over minorities when it comes to things that will supposedly help everyone. See: the aftermath of the New Deal, the systematic loving of black and latino agricultural workers while everyone else got helped, etc. The most recent case study in white progressives loving over minorities is that of a neoliberal careerist hack deploying identity politics to blunt a populist assault on Wall Street because it was her turn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Democrats refused to support it and ran hitpieces against it seems like a good reason why it failed. Yea and then they proceeded to campaign against the watered down healthcare bill they actually passed instead of single payer. And lost their seats anyways.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Benny the Snake posted:I'm angry as hell how Warren and Sanders said they'd cooperate with the president-elect. We know full well who he is, what he's now capable of, and what his cronies are planning. This is the time to declare our full opposition to him, dammit Of course you'd cooperate with the president-elect. The peaceful transition of power is the point. You think they won't oppose him when he gets in office? Get real.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:53
|
|
|
Bagram Airfield was just suicide bombed, killing American service members. https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/suicide-bomber-attacks-bagram-airfield-afghanistan-n682866
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:53
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Serious question do you guys have opinions on my hypothesis? White progressives, do you feel like people like Kamala Harris and Keith Ellison could lead a Bernie-style progressive movement effectively and reach out to the rural and working white poor? Yes. Even covertly racist white dudes would trust a minority progressive over a white one. As politicians, white men have ruined their brand, even with other white men.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Of course you'd cooperate with the president-elect. The peaceful transition of power is the point. You think they won't oppose him when he gets in office? Get real. Stereotype posted:Bagram Airfield was just suicide bombed, killing American service members.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I'm for the former strategy, by the way. Republicans aren't going to vote for Blue Dogs anymore - they're too polarized - and sacrificing the message nationally will depress turnout nationally. This is my thought as well. We need people credibly pushing a message of social and economic justice in every district. A lot will lose, but we don't actually need huge swings in absolute terms to go from Republican dominance to Democratic control. Especially if you can find people who can push the national platform while identifying and championing local issues people care about that don't contradict it. The issues being 1) finding these candidates 2) finding the money to fund them. These aren't insurmountable problems, but they are what they are. One "benefit" is that the Republican candidates running against those "try to focus on local issues to win as a D in a red area" candidates can't just run against Obama anymore. In a lot of lower level elections the Rs would basically equate their opponent to Obama and rile up their base that way, now they can't do that anywhere near as effectively, while Democrats can with Trump. I think this might have a bigger effect on local election turnout than people are expecting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Serious question do you guys have opinions on my hypothesis? White progressives, do you feel like people like Kamala Harris and Keith Ellison could lead a Bernie-style progressive movement effectively and reach out to the rural and working white poor? Minority posters, do you feel that you would be less afraid if the faces of progressivism were overwhelmingly minorities? I feel like if we could find qualified people it would do us good to have more minority candidates. If we claim to be the party of minorities we should be represented by them outside of the most inner city. This seems like a fine political strategy and is probably exactly what will happen unless the Democrats do the most Democrat possible thing and decide that another hard right turn is the better play.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:it's only day three and i am already tired of sanders supporters trying to relitigate the 2016 election tired of Hillary supporters trying to pretend she didn't lose because she was an absolutely terrible candidate
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
The moment Ellison does anything remotely conciliatory, the Berniebros will turn on him just like they did with Warren. For them it is about ideological preening, not protecting anyone or accomplishing anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Apparently this is the fault of late night fake-news comedy shows: http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/11/how-jon-stewart-and-the-daily-show-elected-donald-trump/ The thesis here seems to be "Jon Stewart got Crossfire cancelled and then political discourse died" or something? I don't doubt it's all interrelated, but this really seems like reaching.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:15
|
|
|
spotlessd posted:The most recent case study in white progressives loving over minorities is that of a neoliberal careerist hack deploying identity politics to blunt a populist assault on Wall Street because it was her turn. If her loss means the death of neoliberalism for the foreseeable future then at least some good will come of this nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Of course you'd cooperate with the president-elect. The peaceful transition of power is the point. You think they won't oppose him when he gets in office? Get real. You're right. I'm just anxious as hell how much him and his cronies will wreck once he's settled in 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:The moment Ellison does anything remotely conciliatory, the Berniebros will turn on him just like they did with Warren. Are Bernie supporters turning on Warren? That's news to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Serious question do you guys have opinions on my hypothesis? White progressives, do you feel like people like Kamala Harris and Keith Ellison could lead a Bernie-style progressive movement effectively and reach out to the rural and working white poor? Minority posters, do you feel that you would be less afraid if the faces of progressivism were overwhelmingly minorities? I feel like if we could find qualified people it would do us good to have more minority candidates. If we claim to be the party of minorities we should be represented by them outside of the most inner city. Lightning Knight posted:If the lesson people take from the 2016 primary was "it was rigged" and not "progressives need to invade and take over and reshape the party well before the election, not show up a year out and expect to be handed the keys," we're not going to get anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:The moment Ellison does anything remotely conciliatory, the Berniebros will turn on him just like they did with Warren. What good does it do to have this attitude? Internal sniping is hugely counterproductive. Yell at them if they do it, but not before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
I'd be surprised if even 10% of the people using the term "neoliberalism" knew its meaning beyond "thing I heard is bad."
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I'd be surprised if even 10% of the people using the term "neoliberalism" knew its meaning beyond "thing I heard is bad." Hillary's third-way was humiliated and her neoliberal pals are dead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:So this article seems to debunk the whole " not enough people went out and voted" I guess that's what happens when you can't enforce the hatch act.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Are Bernie supporters turning on Warren? That's news to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I'd be surprised if even 10% of the people using the term "neoliberalism" knew its meaning beyond "thing I heard is bad." I hardly comprehend it. I think it's an economic thing? Basically the same thing as "compassionate capitalism", except it's even faker?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:Oh yes, when Warren endorsed Clinton /r/s4p said she was dead to them, an attitude shared by the real life Berniebros I know. Nobody is turning on Warren.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
I will say, reading the Bernie email I just got, that there are some things I think we need to work on in terms of messaging: Bernie's Email posted:The declining middle class is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics, and the establishment media. People are tired of working longer hours for lower wages, of seeing decent paying jobs go to China and other low-wage countries, of billionaires not paying any federal income taxes, and of not being able to afford a college education for their kids – all while the very rich become much richer. Bernie always wanted to frame things in terms of "the middle class." The middle class is a dogwhistle for white suburbanites and they both a) aren't who we need to reach out to and b) thoroughly Republican. We should be framing things in terms of workers and the working class, not suburbanites. Secondly the framing of "establishment, elitism, (((globalists)))," and all of that crap is alt-right garbage and remember that they use that poo poo to dogwhistle Jewish people. I feel like we can frame a class war without borrowing the words and terminology of the right-wing populists currently trying to murder us. Democrats have bought into Republican framing for far, far too long. I am ambivalent to the talk of "good jobs going to China." I hate the rhetoric and it's stupid but if these people must hear lies of unicorns then so be it I suppose. I just hope we pick representatives who know the difference between what we say and how we will fix the problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Hillary's third-way was humiliated and her neoliberal pals are dead. Nonsense posted:Nobody is turning on Warren.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I will say, reading the Bernie email I just got, that there are some things I think we need to work on in terms of messaging: Good points. I did not know that about the words "establishment" and "elitism", though the ((()))'s kinda tipped me off with that globalists one. Messaging is really tricky. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I will say, reading the Bernie email I just got, that there are some things I think we need to work on in terms of messaging: The other problem using 'the middle class' is how often Republicans also use it. It's hard to want to 'qualify' what it means to both sides, when it may as well mean exactly that. A catchall for white suburbanites. I preferred 'working families', dunno personally what works for everyone. Nonsense fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Nov 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:Confirmed, you don't know what it means. She was a loving New Democrat and the term evolved out of describing the toadies in her husbands administration who went on to back her and advise her throughout the 2000s. Also again, you don't know what the gently caress you're talking about with regard to Warren because the party is no longer under anybody in particular's control right now. Brazille is an interim-leader nothing more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Nobody is turning on Warren. Might want to rewatch her DNC speech, chief.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:I'd be surprised if even 10% of the people using the term "neoliberalism" knew its meaning beyond "thing I heard is bad." It's not that complex an economic philosophy. The real mess is when people start talking about globalization.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
chumbler posted:Might want to rewatch her DNC speech, chief. So you think she turned on her back so he can rub her belly or something? It sounded like a challenge. I saw that interview kid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Good points. I did not know that about the words "establishment" and "elitism", though the ((()))'s kinda tipped me off with that globalists one. Messaging is really tricky. Establishment and elitism aren't specifically Jewish dogwhistles, but globalists absolutely is. They're just the same framing that the alt-right and Trump uses and if we buy into his framing we're arguing on his terms. Like I'm not arguing as the veracity of the terms, just that we can't buy into Republican framing yet again. Nonsense posted:The other problem using 'the middle class' is how often Republicans also use it. It's hard to want to 'qualify' what it means to both sides, when it may as well mean exactly that. A catchall for white suburbanites. I preferred 'working families', dunno personally what works for everyone. Agreed. I hate the concept of "the middle class" because it always implies a perpetual lower class so that they have something to be in the middle of. If we're going to bring white working class people into the fold then refer to them as workers and use some goddamn leftist framing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
The Democrats have no power, and Warren's not going to RAGE about stopping Trump's every move when the Republicans control every branch and will get rid of means of opposition. We don't even know how the Dem side is going to shake out yet. Trump was just elected, he has no power yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 08:35
|
|