|
Eugene V. Dabs posted:The New Deal and Great Society, mostly. How did the Great Society gently caress over racial minorities? The initial New Deal programs I'm familiar with, but the impression I had was that the Great Society clearly and unambiguously tried to include racial minorities in its reach. Just curious, and Wikipedia isn't helping.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 19:11 |
|
|
chumbler posted:Not being bothered to vote against a racist, misogynist, fascist whose administration and fully republican congress would set social and economic progress back decades actually kind of does make you evil, though. ok, so a vast majority of the population (having either voted for trump, or not having voted at all) is evil and unrecruitable/unreachable. what do we do now that evil has won?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:I don't think you can push economic reforms and have the message be believed by poor whites without racism attached to it. I think it was Trump's fairly open racism that convinced those voters that he was genuine and that he really meant it when he said that he would bring the jobs back. I mean, I hope I'm wrong but that's the way I see it. Dems can push economic reform as a part of their platform but I don't think those poor, rust belt whites will be swayed away from economic populism plus racism by economic populism plus equality. Poor whites believed in Obama's economic message to a large enough extent that it put him in the White House. No reason we can't make it happen again. These people didn't vote for Trump, even with his racism. They just stayed home. UV_Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Nov 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:I have been trying to find but have not found concrete analysis that demonstrates the effects voter suppression had this election. I don't know if anybody is going to actually do a study of it either though...
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Sharkopath posted:I don't think there are any studies yet but there was widespread closing of polling places and cut hours that lead to documented incredibly long lines at certain sites. There's no funding in academia to do any studies of anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Condiv posted:ok, so a vast majority of the population (having either voted for trump, or not having voted at all) is evil and unrecruitable/unreachable. what do we do now that evil has won? Wait for them to gently caress poo poo up so badly we can come back with a hope and change message that recovered some amount of the lost 2016 vote.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:I don't think you can push economic reforms and have the message be believed by poor whites without racism attached to it. I think it was Trump's fairly open racism that convinced those voters that he was genuine and that he really meant it when he said that he would bring the jobs back. I mean, I hope I'm wrong but that's the way I see it. Dems can push economic reform as a part of their platform but I don't think those poor, rust belt whites will be swayed away from economic populism plus racism by economic populism plus equality. I think this is silly. Not every working class white person who didnt vote is going to have being racist as one of their top priorities. Beyond this, a bit of economic populism could've helped the youth vote or minority turnout for Dems, considering Trump outran Romney in every minority category (if I'm not mistaken) despite running a virulently racist campaign. Rejecting the championing of progressivism and policy that might actually connect with normal people is not going to win Democrats any elections.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
chumbler posted:Not being bothered to vote against a racist, misogynist, fascist whose administration and fully republican congress would set social and economic progress back decades actually kind of does make you evil, though. Yes and by all means shame friends and acquaintances who didn't vote, but understand that for the party to move forward it needs a candidate and a platform that motivates people, not merely reiterating that plutocratic orange fascist racists are bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
One of my colleagues literally just tried to argue on my facebook that Trump is not racist or sexist because women and black people voted for him..... this guy went to Cambridge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Above all, the issue is that Hillary was a weak candidate that couldn't excite her party for reasons that were partly her fault and partly foisted upon her unfairly. The platform that came out of the 2016 DNC is good but she wasn't the right messenger for it. I think the Dems already have the blueprint for how to go forward, they just need the right people at the top of the party who can take advantage of how poo poo the next few years are going to be and motivate the Democratic base to be energized not just about one or two individual candidates but the party as a whole. People really loved Obama and his coattails helped a lot, but the Dems have been playing the role of goalie for the past six years, not really making a proactive case for themselves as anything other than the plug keeping all the water from draining out of the bathtub. The tables have flipped and now it's the Dems' turn to be the fiery opposition party against an unpopular administration, should they choose to be that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:I don't think you can push economic reforms and have the message be believed by poor whites without racism attached to it. I think it was Trump's fairly open racism that convinced those voters that he was genuine and that he really meant it when he said that he would bring the jobs back. I mean, I hope I'm wrong but that's the way I see it. Dems can push economic reform as a part of their platform but I don't think those poor, rust belt whites will be swayed away from economic populism plus racism by economic populism plus equality. Voting for economic populism and racism are not inextricably linked: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/business/economy/can-trump-save-their-jobs-theyre-counting-on-it.html Many of the Rust Belt voters voted for Obama without reservation because they thought he would take their concerns seriously. They didn't think Hillary would.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Suckthemonkey posted:How did the Great Society gently caress over racial minorities? The initial New Deal programs I'm familiar with, but the impression I had was that the Great Society clearly and unambiguously tried to include racial minorities in its reach. Just curious, and Wikipedia isn't helping. It didn't necessarily gently caress over racial minorities, more than it didn't go far enough to put minorities on an equal footing with white people and thus ended up favoring the white working class, as had the New Deal
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Wait for them to gently caress poo poo up so badly we can come back with a hope and change message that recovered some amount of the lost 2016 vote. they won't come back (and you don't want them) they're evil remember? we refused to appeal to them this election and win this election because they were evil
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:The tables have flipped and now it's the Dems' turn to be the fiery opposition party against an unpopular administration, should they choose to be that. Yea, which democrats are those fiery opponents? Those orators with steel in their belly again? Is that tammy duckworth or chuck schumer? lol Condiv posted:they won't come back (and you don't want them) Can you take your strawmen and shove them up your rear end along with your pseudoconcern posting for central america?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:23
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:Poor whites believed in Obama's economic message to a large enough extent that it put him in the White House. No reason we can't make it happen again. Who ran against Obama with the message of economic reform plus extremely open racism? Obama ran against an ancient Washington insider & war vet and a technocratic corporate CEO, the latter of which is exactly the sort of shithead who shipped away all the jobs in the rust belt. You really are not making a valid comparison.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:Above all, the issue is that Hillary was a weak candidate that couldn't excite her party for reasons that were partly her fault and partly foisted upon her unfairly. The platform that came out of the 2016 DNC is good but she wasn't the right messenger for it. I think the Dems already have the blueprint for how to go forward, they just need the right people at the top of the party who can take advantage of how poo poo the next few years are going to be and motivate the Democratic base to be energized not just about one or two individual candidates but the party as a whole. People really loved Obama and his coattails helped a lot, but the Dems have been playing the role of goalie for the past six years, not really making a proactive case for themselves as anything other than the plug keeping all the water from draining out of the bathtub. The tables have flipped and now it's the Dems' turn to be the fiery opposition party against an unpopular administration, should they choose to be that. i'm very much for this. i just don't believe the old guard is up to the task. reading up on the hillary campaign they were clearly high on their own farts for a very long time, and i don't know if I trust that they've woken up. keith ellison saw the trump threat coming though, and he has bernie's endorsement, so he sounds like a good chairman for the DNC to me
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Paper Planes posted:One of my colleagues literally just tried to argue on my facebook that Trump is not racist or sexist because women and black people voted for him..... this guy went to Cambridge. He's kind of halfway there because it didn't matter that he was racist or sexist because Latinos and women still voted for him. Doesn't make him right though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Paper Planes posted:One of my colleagues literally just tried to argue on my facebook that Trump is not racist or sexist because women and black people voted for him..... this guy went to Cambridge. Ah, the illustrious college educated white Trump voters. gently caress him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Who ran against Obama with the message of economic reform plus extremely open racism? Obama ran against an ancient Washington insider & war vet and a technocratic corporate CEO, the latter of which is exactly the sort of shithead who shipped away all the jobs in the rust belt. You really are not making a valid comparison. All data suggests that Obama would've crushed Trump. It turns out that people like "authenticity" and Hillary didn't project that - as fair or unfair as that may have been. Your idea that the only way to get the working class to buy into economic reform is via racism is one of the more perplexing and elitist opinions I have had the good fortune to see expressed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Can you take your strawmen and shove them up your rear end along with your pseudoconcern posting for central america? you literally called them evil a post ago and implied that why we shouldn't have chased their vote this election. IMO, you're just throwing a tantrum looking for anyone to blame but abuela for her loss. quote:Yea, which democrats are those fiery opponents? Those orators with steel in their belly again? Is that tammy duckworth or chuck schumer? lol bernie sanders for one you muppet
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Bill Maher is the last person who needs to be listened to. He is an utter garbage human being and the only reason he's not a member of the Green party is because he knows he'd be seen as the joke he is instead of treated with more respect than he deserves. According to Maher yesterday, democrats lost because of PC police and sticking up for Muslims. gently caress him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Who ran against Obama with the message of economic reform plus extremely open racism? Obama ran against an ancient Washington insider & war vet and a technocratic corporate CEO, the latter of which is exactly the sort of shithead who shipped away all the jobs in the rust belt. You really are not making a valid comparison. Pre-Trump republicans were plenty racist, although they preferred the dog whistle. The most telling detail is that the former Obama-voting white working class chose to stay home - they didn't vote Trump. They were simply left cold by Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
gohmak posted:According to Maher yesterday, democrats lost because of PC police and sticking up for Muslims. gently caress him. Yeah, want a great way to make sure Dems stay irrelevant forever? Adopt the Maher school of politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
gohmak posted:According to Maher yesterday, democrats lost because of PC police and sticking up for Muslims. gently caress him. I haven't been paying attention to that guy for years, has he just become a complete lunatic?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Yeah Maher is just a racist who believe in climate change.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Condiv posted:you literally called them evil a post ago and implied that why we shouldn't have chased their vote this election. IMO, you're just throwing a tantrum looking for anyone to blame but abuela for her loss. The gently caress are you even talking about
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Bill Maher is, was, and will always be trash and I'm glad that he hasn't been relevant in over a decade
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:Bill Maher is, was, and will always be trash and I'm glad that he hasn't been relevant in over a decade So is Michael Moore but that doesn't make him any less right about what happened this election
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:The gently caress are you even talking about why are you responding to a question i asked chumbler? if you don't think the people who didn't vote for hillary against trump are evil then why are you responding to me?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Condiv posted:ok, so a vast majority of the population (having either voted for trump, or not having voted at all) is evil and unrecruitable/unreachable. what do we do now that evil has won? Pray for a swift death. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:So is Michael Moore but that doesn't make him any less right about what happened this election You cannot be for real
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Pray for a swift death. imo, it's better to have an economic platform that isn't racist and try to appeal to such people in non-racist ways. of course, i don't think the people who didn't vote for hillary are evil either
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I haven't been paying attention to that guy for years, has he just become a complete lunatic? He's been one for a long time. It's just that it's easy to sound reasonable compared to George W Bush when he's president.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:36
|
|
Eugene V. Dabs posted:All data suggests that Obama would've crushed Trump. It turns out that people like "authenticity" and Hillary didn't project that - as fair or unfair as that may have been. Like I said before, I think that racism acts as a signal for authenticity, a really really strong one too. "I'm willing to be so honest with you that I will say things that make everyone hate me!" And I think that perception of authenticity is so important that even people who don't favor the racism itself will go for the authentic candidate in spite of their racism.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dabs posted:It didn't necessarily gently caress over racial minorities, more than it didn't go far enough to put minorities on an equal footing with white people and thus ended up favoring the white working class, as had the New Deal I agree that it didn't go far enough, at least with the laws that they did manage to pass alone, but the impression I had was that that was at least the long-term goal, but that some of the components (e.g. ending discrimination in housing) created a backlash that led to Nixon getting elected, a lot of the supporters getting either voted out or changing their minds on them, and the whole effort getting cut short before it really had the chance to do the most good. As I mentioned, I understand the case with the New Deal all the way. Social Security was explicitly written to exclude the bulk of indigent blacks, and the housing initiatives led to horrible poo poo like redlining. But the impression I got was that, if the Great Society really had a chance to be fully implemented as intended and there wasn't a backlash against 'the welfare state', it could've really did some good (and I know it did lead to a real drop in poverty, although I don't know the numbers in black vs. white, and I'd imagine that it was indeed concentrated on the white side). I'm sure that some white liberals don't really take the issues of racial minorities strongly to heart and may, if they find it beneficial to them, dump them when possible. (The larger white working class as a whole certainly will.) But I'm sure that some wouldn't, and either way, I don't see how the attitude is constructive at this point. Regardless of the possibilities and our own particular interests, we need each other to make progress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Condiv posted:why are you responding to a question i asked chumbler? if you don't think the people who didn't vote for hillary against trump are evil then why are you responding to me? You replied directly to me, are you losing your mind or was it some kind of dry sarcasm I was supposed to get
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
zegermans posted:Yeah Maher is just a racist who believe in climate change. Pretty much. He'll be cheering Trump on when we let Russia invade Syria and then invade/nuke Iran because oops they have the bomb!
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Who ran against Obama with the message of economic reform plus extremely open racism? Obama ran against an ancient Washington insider & war vet and a technocratic corporate CEO, the latter of which is exactly the sort of shithead who shipped away all the jobs in the rust belt. You really are not making a valid comparison. There was a substantial measure of successful messaging involved with how Obama painted McCain as more of the same poo poo from Bush and Romney as Literally The Guy Who Closed Your MILLS. Hillary did absolutely nothing of the sort until the tail end of the third debate where she mentioned chinese steel twice. The DNC took rural post-industrial bitter types for granted because they had people like Obama and Bernie and completely squandered the appeal those two actually had with the people they actually needed. Turns out some segments of the population need more coddling then a couple electoral cycles of attention. The best hope for Dems is finding a younger Bernie without the hellacious accent who is capable of running on a message of "No poo poo you've been lied to, but they were really good liars. They told you they'd bring the jobs back because it was taxes that took them away and instead they cut taxes and handed big bags of money to the people who took your jobs overseas." gently caress, they need a non-racist Huey Long.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
The entire episode was utter worthlessness. They had the nerve to actually say Trump tapped into the concerns of the people that the system was rigged against them. I wonder were I heard that from because Bernie Sanders name wasn't brought up once.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 19:11 |
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:You replied directly to me, are you losing your mind or was it some kind of dry sarcasm I was supposed to get you quoted a question i asked chumbler: Condiv posted:ok, so a vast majority of the population (having either voted for trump, or not having voted at all) is evil and unrecruitable/unreachable. what do we do now that evil has won? why are you answering a question meant for another poster when it doesn't concern you? stop being a fool
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:42
|
|