uspol november: as it turns out they could not stump the trump

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > uspol november: as it turns out they could not stump the trump

«‹›594 »

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

I don't know who to trust anymore in here. Both sides have good points and bad points. All I know is that I won't abandon minority issues and give legitimacy to creepy misogynistic and anti-LGBT crap.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 1, 2024 01:05

Squinty: Aug 12, 2007

chumbler posted:

Whole lot of twisting and goal post moving to try to blame Clinton going on here. "People don't like her on the economy" except apparently they did prefer her on the economy even in swing states. "She didn't turn out enough voters" except she a) won the popular vote and b) it's looking like her turnout is higher than any other recent candidate except Obama. I don't know guys, seeing how the demographics broke down, I think some sort of ism might have been involved.

Of course there's ism involved, there always is. But the people who thought Trump's campaign was propped up solely by racism and sexism, myself included, were the same people who were planning their victory parties weeks ago, myself included. When your thesis of a Clinton landslide is proven utterly and totally false, it's time to shut up and listen to the people whose predictions were eerily prescient and cited the economy and the rust belt as reasons Trump would win - people like Mark Blyth and, begrudgingly, Michael Moore.

I live in Texas, and if racism and anti-immigrant sentiment were the tipping point for this election than Trump would have dominated here. Instead Hillary gained 500k votes over Obama in 2012.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:23

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Condiv posted:

if it was the most important part of the election and she won on it then she would've won. why are you still going on about analyzing polls that can't possibly fix the issues you're dealing with?

She did win, but by the tiniest margins, while she lost in all other categories.

I mean, this is another one of the great "well, technically she did nothing wrong" moments of the Clinton campaign. Yes, she was recognized as about equal to Trump, that wasn't enough, obviously. In fact, it is a comical failure for a candidate supposed to be a sly policy fox with a great economic platform.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:24

RaySmuckles: Oct 14, 2009; Grimey Drawer

lol at all the people still trying to say the take away from this election is "change nothing and keep calling everyone racist"

do people not remember hillary clinton being the perfect candidate? the entire platform will forever manifest in people like her. and it lost. to donald "lol" trump.

stop trying to justify this election as a squeaker. even if hillary had won the election by barely flipping those vital states, it would still be a down election where hillary did significantly worse than the last two elections.

what happens when the republicans run their own charismatic candidate? or worse, what if trump somehow blunders his way into popular legislation and people actually like him?

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:25

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

RaySmuckles posted:

lol at all the people still trying to say the take away from this election is "change nothing and keep calling everyone racist"

do people not remember hillary clinton being the perfect candidate? the entire platform will forever manifest in people like her. and it lost. to donald "lol" trump.

stop trying to justify this election as a squeaker. even if hillary had won the election by barely flipping those vital states, it would still be a down election where hillary did significantly worse than the last two elections.

what happens when the republicans run their own charismatic candidate? or worse, what if trump somehow blunders his way into popular legislation and people actually like him?

Hillary was the perfect presidential candidate, who did technically all the smart things, as dictated by a technically advanced computer program, and in the end she won in all ways, except technically.

It's like poetry, it rhymes.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

RaySmuckles posted:

lol at all the people still trying to say the take away from this election is "change nothing and keep calling everyone racist"

I'm going to change everything and still call racists racists. I'm just gonna be smarter about it. What do we do about the white supremacists and rising Nazi sentiment?

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

B B: Dec 1, 2005

Apparently Bernie supporters are already taking steps at the state/local level to take over leadership positions:

Politico posted:

Bernie's empire strikes back

In state after state, supporters of the Vermont senator's presidential bid are challenging the Democratic establishment for party control.

The revolution is back in business.

Supporters of Bernie Sanders' failed presidential bid are seizing on Democratic disarray at the national level to launch a wave of challenges to Democratic Party leaders in the states.

The goal is to replace party officials in states where Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton during the acrimonious Democratic primary with more progressive leadership. But the challenges also represent a reckoning for state party leaders who, in many cases, tacitly supported Clinton's bid.

�I think the Bernie people feel very strongly that they were abused, somehow neglected during the primary process and the conventions,� said Severin Beliveau, a former Maine Democratic Party chairman who supported Sanders in the primary. �In Maine, for instance, where Bernie got 70 percent of the caucus vote, they are emboldened and in effect want to try to replace [Maine Democratic Party chairman] Phil Bartlett, who supported Clinton.�

It only took one day after the presidential election for Maine state Rep. Diane Russell, an outspoken Sanders supporter who helped spearhead a push to change how the state allocates its superdelegates, to announce her plans to challenge Bartlett. Russell, whose superdelegate reform effort was sparked by frustration over the fact that a majority of Maine�s superdelegates backed Clinton despite Sanders� dominance in the state�s caucuses, is positioning herself as a liberal alternative to Bartlett.

In Wisconsin, Democrats are quietly predicting that the party chair will face a challenger who will hold incumbent chairwoman Martha Laning to account for why Clinton lost the state. Laning cast her vote as a superdelegate for Clinton � in a state where Sanders won the primary by a wide margin.

Wisconsin Democratic National Committee member Jason Rae, who previously challenged Laning himself, said it's unclear who will run but noted the state party has a tradition of contested contests.

"We haven't really had a state chair election in Wisconsin that's been unopposed. There have been very few years where it's been unopposed anyway, even when we've won everything," said Rae.

The movement outside Washington to install new leadership � especially new leaders whose progressive credentials include support for Sanders� presidential bid � mirrors the battle in the nation�s capital for the Democratic National Committee chairmanship in the wake of the devastating Clinton defeat and congressional elections where Democrats failed to win back either the House or the Senate. Sanders has endorsed Rep. Keith Ellison, leading House progressive and a prominent backer of his presidential campaign, to be the next permanent DNC chairman.

In Wisconsin, the hunger for fresh leadership comes after an election where the state voted for a Republican for president for the first time in 32 years, and Democrats failed to knock off Ron Johnson, widely considered one of the nation�s most vulnerable Republican senators.

"I think she's going to have a heck of a difficult time getting reelected and I'm wondering if there's even a chance that she doesn't run again. She just suffered the largest defeat in Democratic Party history," said a former top Wisconsin Democratic Party official of Laning. "I think that any time that happens there are a lot of people who for rational or occasionally irrational reasons want to wipe the slate clean."

In Nebraska, another state where the Vermont senator defeated Clinton in the caucuses, the upheaval took place in June, not long after the state caucuses. Prominent Sanders supporter Jane Kleeb doesn�t actually take office until December but she�s already taking steps to overhaul the party by bringing in Sanders activists and supporters.

So far, the incoming chairman's focus has been to replace lobbyists and centrist donors with activist liberals. Kleeb said 70 percent of her appointments are Sanders supporters.

"I've already made my appointments and I think that's to the disappointment of some traditional Democrats," she said, pointing to the Sanders backers she brought in to party committees, and one to serve as an associate chairman of the state party.

Hawaii Democrats also installed a new Sanders-connected state chairman, Tim Vandeveer, in the months after Sanders decisively defeated Clinton in the state�s March caucuses. A liberal activist and outspoken Sanders supporter, Vandeveer said since Trump's win on Tuesday he's focused on re-calibrating his party there and wanted his party to lean more on its backbone, organized labor.

"I mean, without laying blame, and I've seen a thousand different sources laying blame at the feet of a thousand different people, we have to recognize that what we did in this last election didn't work. Whatever the reason, whatever the reason it didn't work," Vandeveer said. "We have a model, it wasn't invented by Bernie Sanders but was certainly utilized by Bernie Sanders, of organizing and appealing to the frustrations of working class voters that did work in some of the most progressive states in our country, the traditional Democratic states, which Secretary Clinton unfortunately did not carry. And that model needs, in my opinion, to come to the fore once again. Because Democrats have got to find their mojo and people right now are scared."

The plan, Vandeveer said, is to work more on organizing with labor unions and move toward the Sanders model of fundraising.

"I think we've got to do what I just said, which is organize, start training our people, start being more transparent with the way we're funding our party and it means returning our funding by and large to grassroots donations," he said. "And that's not an ideological thing. That, in my mind, is something that makes good financial sense because the party in my opinion has been a series of peaks and valleys financially."

On Wednesday Vandeveer joined a call hosted by the Association of State Democratic Chairs to discuss where to go next after the election. The wide-ranging call included a discussion on how to reinvigorate their parties in the states as Democrats look to overhaul the DNC in Washington.

"We're talking about next steps as far as what the structure of the party looks like. We just started to begin the discussion yesterday about the future of the DNC," Vandeveer said of the call. "But folks know that something's gotta give and people in the party have got to trust our DNC and that's not something that by and large the membership has right now, especially the folks that came out of the Bernie Sanders camp."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/bernie-sanders-empire-strikes-back-231259

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

HorseLord: Aug 26, 2014

RaySmuckles posted:

lol at all the people still trying to say the take away from this election is "change nothing and keep calling everyone racist"

do people not remember hillary clinton being the perfect candidate? the entire platform will forever manifest in people like her. and it lost. to donald "lol" trump.

stop trying to justify this election as a squeaker. even if hillary had won the election by barely flipping those vital states, it would still be a down election where hillary did significantly worse than the last two elections.

what happens when the republicans run their own charismatic candidate? or worse, what if trump somehow blunders his way into popular legislation and people actually like him?

If they didn't have delusions of adequacy they wouldn't be Democrats.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

Nonsense: Jan 26, 2007

This is unbelievable.

https://twitter.com/jimtankersley/status/797492671631790084

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

Josef bugman: Nov 17, 2011; Pictured: Poster prepares to celebrate Holy Communion (probablY)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Pollyanna posted:

I don't know who to trust anymore in here. Both sides have good points and bad points. All I know is that I won't abandon minority issues and give legitimacy to creepy misogynistic and anti-LGBT crap.

I agree. I only think a few of them are arguing that and those people should be ignored or shunned. A focus on economics is important, and upholding justice is also important. I just hope we get through the next 4 years.

quote:

"I mean, without laying blame, and I've seen a thousand different sources laying blame at the feet of a thousand different people, we have to recognize that what we did in this last election didn't work. Whatever the reason, whatever the reason it didn't work," Vandeveer said. "We have a model, it wasn't invented by Bernie Sanders but was certainly utilized by Bernie Sanders, of organizing and appealing to the frustrations of working class voters that did work in some of the most progressive states in our country, the traditional Democratic states, which Secretary Clinton unfortunately did not carry. And that model needs, in my opinion, to come to the fore once again. Because Democrats have got to find their mojo and people right now are scared."

The plan, Vandeveer said, is to work more on organizing with labor unions and move toward the Sanders model of fundraising.

I like this plan too.

Josef bugman fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Nov 12, 2016

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

Benny the Snake: Apr 11, 2012; GUM CHEWING INTENSIFIES

Business Gorillas posted:

The Ghostbusters movie is a perfect analogy for this, actually.

A lovely corporate rehash of the same tired poo poo we've been getting for years purposefully cultivated the idea that any criticism of it makes you a bigot. It wrapped itself in identity politics, isolated major demographics, and ended up to be a total flop because it turns out it was a bad movie from the start and everyone knew it.

Red Letter Media was right :stonk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEKreyTkvA

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

UV_Catastrophe: Dec 29, 2008; Of all the words of mice and men, the saddest are,

"It might have been."; Pillbug

Democrats won't be able to even sniff the reins of power unless they can satisfy voters on both social issues and economic issues.

Don't you worry about democrats with the Wrong Opinion coming to dominate the party. The party will continue to hold 0 power until they find candidates that unite the entire coalition.

Until then, we can enjoy Trump.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:27

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Pollyanna posted:

I'm going to change everything and still call racists racists. I'm just gonna be smarter about it. What do we do about the white supremacists and rising Nazi sentiment?

Isolate them so they cannibalize themselves. Identify how they groom their followers, and attack those pathways, while sending messages of your own at the same targets as they were.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:29

Shammypants: May 25, 2004; Let me tell you about true luxury.

Bill Maher is 100% right, we need a nasty motherfucker next time. It's too bad the democrats cannibalized DWS and Weiner cannibailized himself by being a shithead because we haven't had anyone decent since then to combat the GOP. Now we just have Obama/Clinton style millennial nice guys and poo poo for brain drum circle folk. We're in a lot of trouble if the meanest person the Democrats have in the next few years is loving Michael Moore.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:29

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

XyrlocShammypants posted:

Bill Maher is 100% right, we need a nasty motherfucker next time. It's too bad the democrats cannibalized DWS and Weiner because we haven't had anyone decent since then to combat the GOP. Now we just have Obama/Clinton style millennial nice guys and poo poo for brain drum circle folk. We're in a lot of trouble if the meanest person the Democrats have in the next few years is loving Michael Moore.

holy

yeah we need two of the worst dems in the dem party as members of our leadership. maybe wiener could tweet cheeky dick pics to donald trump

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:31

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

DWS and Weiner? Do you mean PR cancer?

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:31

Josef bugman: Nov 17, 2011; Pictured: Poster prepares to celebrate Holy Communion (probablY)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

XyrlocShammypants posted:

Bill Maher is 100% right, we need a nasty motherfucker next time. It's too bad the democrats cannibalized DWS and Weiner because we haven't had anyone decent since then to combat the GOP. Now we just have Obama/Clinton style millennial nice guys and poo poo for brain drum circle folk. We're in a lot of trouble if the meanest person the Democrats have in the next few years is loving Michael Moore.

Weiner is an actual sex criminal and DWS was evidentially not all that as her strategy management in charge of the 50 states things, from what I read, meant the democrats were hosed over conclusively during the last two "none presidential" elections.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:31

Shammypants: May 25, 2004; Let me tell you about true luxury.

Josef bugman posted:

Weiner is an actual sex criminal and DWS was evidentially not all that as her strategy management in charge of the 50 states things, from what I read, meant the democrats were hosed over conclusively during the last two "none presidential" elections.

Yea my phone ate the part where I said Weiner cannibalized himself

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:32

Shammypants: May 25, 2004; Let me tell you about true luxury.

steinrokkan posted:

DWS and Weiner? Do you mean PR cancer?

Only democrats are worried about PR. Republicans are concerned with winning elections. We've got nice guy Van Jones who is, half the time, agreeing with Republicans, sitting next to Corey Lewandowski and whatever that old fuckers name is who thinks it's respectable political conversation to ask people to look for a sex tape.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:33

Dafte: Jul 21, 2001; Techno. Logical. Pimp.

Nonsense posted:

This is unbelievable.

https://twitter.com/jimtankersley/status/797492671631790084

They were this incompetent? Holy poo poo.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:34

Aves Maria!: Jul 26, 2008; Maybe I'll drown

XyrlocShammypants posted:

Bill Maher is 100% right, we need a nasty motherfucker next time. It's too bad the democrats cannibalized DWS and Weiner cannibailized himself by being a shithead because we haven't had anyone decent since then to combat the GOP. Now we just have Obama/Clinton style millennial nice guys and poo poo for brain drum circle folk. We're in a lot of trouble if the meanest person the Democrats have in the next few years is loving Michael Moore.

Agreed, we should nominate a guy who is unyielding in attacking Muslims and anyone who disagrees with her/him. We should nominate Donald Trump

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:34

fishmech: Jul 16, 2006; by VideoGames; Salad Prong

Xae posted:

A Constitution Convention is a non starter.

For one there are no rules for it.

Not really. All a legit constitutional convention, like in the sense of "we're completely replacing the whole thing" needs is the consent of a majority of the economically powerful states. Because a brand new constitution is going to be enforced on its own terms, not through a pre-existing one. Much like how the current one was enforced without benefit of any ties to the Articles of Confederation. Once the new thing is in power, you'd maybe pass an amendment to the existing one saying "strike all this, refer to newconst 2.0" or whatever. But that would just be a formality.

The rules the original Convention used were hashed out over the course of the 2 year process, but were essentially based on existing rules used in Congress and the British Parliament. It would be much the same in a modern one - basic rules of order but no special rules. You're running the thing to create a whole new order after all.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:34

chumbler: Mar 28, 2010

XyrlocShammypants posted:

Bill Maher is 100% right, we need a nasty motherfucker next time. It's too bad the democrats cannibalized DWS and Weiner cannibailized himself by being a shithead because we haven't had anyone decent since then to combat the GOP. Now we just have Obama/Clinton style millennial nice guys and poo poo for brain drum circle folk. We're in a lot of trouble if the meanest person the Democrats have in the next few years is loving Michael Moore.

But what if they're nasty about minority issues at all and white people have a sad and decide to take their ball and go home?

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:34

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

XyrlocShammypants posted:

Only democrats are worried about PR. Republicans are concerned with winning elections. We've got nice guy Van Jones who is, half the time, agreeing with Republicans, sitting next to Corey Lewandowski and whatever that old fuckers name is who thinks it's respectable political conversation to ask people to look for a sex tape.

Hillary Clinton lost in large part because everybody know her as a lying, unscrupulous son of a bitch. Let's replace her with Mrs. Crony Election Stealer and Mr. Compulsive Cheater

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:35

ozmunkeh: Feb 28, 2008; hey guys what is happening in this thread

chumbler posted:

Whole lot of twisting and goal post moving to try to blame Clinton going on here. "People don't like her on the economy" except apparently they did prefer her on the economy even in swing states. "She didn't turn out enough voters" except she a) won the popular vote and b) it's looking like her turnout is higher than any other recent candidate except Obama. I don't know guys, seeing how the demographics broke down, I think some sort of ism might have been involved and the economy maybe wasn't actually the big issue.

Who cares if she won the popular vote nationwide, there are a poo poo load of people (and growing) in democratic strongholds like CA, NY etc. Did she win the popular vote in WI, MI, OH, FL or PA? Our survey says EH-UHHH. The electoral college is what matters and everyone knew that going into the election. Whining about some other metric in which she pulled better numbers is entirely pointless. We know democrats are going to turn out to vote for their candidate in CA and NY and we know there are a lot of them. The campaign did nothing to make sure the same thing happened anywhere else and now we have president Trump. Look at all the stories that are coming out now about people pleading with the campaign to do something in their state or to pay attention to them or their issue and being completely ignored. They assumed this was a lead in to her coronation, took everyone for granted, ran a poo poo campaign and lost.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:36

My Linux Rig: Mar 27, 2010; Can't post for 6 years!

UV_Catastrophe posted:

Democrats won't be able to even sniff the reins of power unless they can satisfy voters on both social issues and economic issues.

Don't you worry about democrats with the Wrong Opinion coming to dominate the party. The party will continue to hold 0 power until they find candidates that unite the entire coalition.

Until then, we can enjoy Trump.

Wait....

Wait...

Are you saying Dems might actually have to consider the concerns conservatives have instead of just disregarding them as bigots???

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:37

Aves Maria!: Jul 26, 2008; Maybe I'll drown

My Linux Rig posted:

Wait....

Wait...

Are you saying Dems might actually have to consider the concerns conservatives have instead of just disregarding them as bigots???

They tried a "Third Way". It was called the Clintons. Bowing to conservatism is absolutely the wrong tack to take.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:39

Fajita Queen: Jun 21, 2012

My Linux Rig posted:

Wait....

Wait...

Are you saying Dems might actually have to consider the concerns conservatives have instead of just disregarding them as bigots???

Actually the exact opposite of this. That's what Bill did and look where that got us.

Instead of trying to pander to moderate conservatives and disheartening progressives, we need to do what the Republicans did and tell the opposition exactly which way they can go gently caress themselves.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:40

Nonsense: Jan 26, 2007

Eugene V. Dabs posted:

They tried a "Third Way". It was called the Clintons. Bowing to conservatism is absolutely the wrong tack to take.

To be fair if Hillary had won this election she would stomp the motherfucking GOP into paste, and laugh as they squealed.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:40

Redrum and Coke: Feb 25, 2006; wAstIng 10 bUcks ON an aVaTar iS StUpid

The Shortest Path posted:

Actually the exact opposite of this. That's what Bill did and look where that got us.

So they should disregard them all as bigots? Boy, I hope you enjoy Trump for 8 years then.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:41

My Linux Rig: Mar 27, 2010; Can't post for 6 years!

Eugene V. Dabs posted:

They tried a "Third Way". It was called the Clintons. Bowing to conservatism is absolutely the wrong tack to take.

Clinton didn't exactly seem inviting to "deplorables".

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:41

Sublimer: Sep 20, 2007; get yo' game up

Could one of you post that old MLK related picture with writing scrawled around it calling him a terrorist or extremist or something like that? Sorry to be so vague, but I've seen it posted here on SA from time to time and can't find it on Google.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:42

Condiv: May 7, 2008; Sorry to undo the effort of paying a domestic abuser $10 to own this poster, but I am going to lose my dang mind if I keep seeing multiple posters who appear to be Baloogan.

With love,
a mod

Eugene V. Dabs posted:

They tried a "Third Way". It was called the Clintons. Bowing to conservatism is absolutely the wrong tack to take.

well we don't have to. conservative voters might be able to be reached by what would be considered tradionally democratic platforms. stuff like protecting our workers and bringing manufacturing jobs back and trying to make sure that blue collar workers can live a decent life even though they don't have a university degree

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:42

Zerg Mans: Oct 19, 2006

XyrlocShammypants posted:

Only democrats are worried about PR. Republicans are concerned with winning elections. We've got nice guy Van Jones who is, half the time, agreeing with Republicans, sitting next to Corey Lewandowski and whatever that old fuckers name is who thinks it's respectable political conversation to ask people to look for a sex tape.

Van Jones lost a white house appointment solely for being an angry black man under Glenn Beck's microscope. There's a reason he tries to be the polite punching bag.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:42

Aves Maria!: Jul 26, 2008; Maybe I'll drown

The Shortest Path posted:

Actually the exact opposite of this. That's what Bill did and look where that got us.

Actually, I think you'll find that in an election where the Dem base couldn't be bothered to turn out or vote D that we should've instead ignored those people's concerns even more and instead screamed about ISIS and immigrants.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:43

WorldsStongestNerd: Apr 28, 2010; by Fluffdaddy

Pollyanna posted:

I don't know who to trust anymore in here. Both sides have good points and bad points. All I know is that I won't abandon minority issues and give legitimacy to creepy misogynistic and anti-LGBT crap.

Nit a single person has said abandon minority issues. We are saying economic issues have to be given equal footing. Some posters in this thread are not smart enough to do two things at once. They think it's a zero sum game where if you care about other issues, it means you don't have enough care left over for minority rights.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:43

Redrum and Coke: Feb 25, 2006; wAstIng 10 bUcks ON an aVaTar iS StUpid

zegermans posted:

Van Jones lost a white house appointment solely for being an angry black man under Glenn Beck's microscope. There's a reason he tries to be the polite punching bag.

And he sure loves to complain about white people for Trump, instead of his poo poo president and his poo poo candidate.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:43

Tatsuta Age: Apr 21, 2005; so good at being in trouble

Pollyanna posted:

I don't know who to trust anymore in here. Both sides have good points and bad points. All I know is that I won't abandon minority issues and give legitimacy to creepy misogynistic and anti-LGBT crap.

pretty clear which side you're on then :shrug:

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:44

Fajita Queen: Jun 21, 2012

Bishounen Bonanza posted:

Nit a single person has said abandon minority issues. We are saying economic issues have to be given equal footing. Some posters in this thread are not smart enough to do two things at once. They think it's a zero sum game where if you care about other issues, it means you don't have enough care left over for minority rights.

That's fine and dandy except white progressives have a long, storied history of loving over minorities in the implementation of economic fixes.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 1, 2024 01:05

Jack2142: Jul 17, 2014; Shitposting in Seattle

My Linux Rig posted:

Clinton didn't exactly seem inviting to "deplorables".

No but trying to peel off the R voters who want nothing to do with the democratic platform except maybe aren't racists didn't help.

# ? Nov 12, 2016 19:44

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > uspol november: as it turns out they could not stump the trump

«‹›594 »