|
AVeryLargeRadish posted: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. So you run a nominally populist message with an authentic messenger sans racism and voila, you're going to pick up working class voters.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:15 |
|
|
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. So the best case scenario is 8 years of new Obama, doing nothing, and waiting for Trump 2.0?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Condiv posted:chumbler: This is the weakest insult I've ever seen. Step up your game, son. And vary it up, too. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
gohmak posted:According to Maher yesterday, democrats lost because of PC police and sticking up for Muslims. gently caress him. Where did he say that??
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
gohmak posted:According to Maher yesterday, democrats lost because of PC police and sticking up for Muslims. gently caress him. it hasn't been a great couple of days for liberals 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Condiv posted:oh i agree, liberals and white liberals are out of touch. look at this idiot for example I agree that this guy is a fuckhead, but Bernie's one of the big people pushing for Ellison, which would seem to be a great opportunity for us to embrace underrepresented minorities and an economically progressive message. I really hope he gets it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/yokoono/status/797187458505080834
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:So the best case scenario is 8 years of new Obama, doing nothing, and waiting for Trump 2.0? No, the best scenario is actually reordering the dem party so that the centrist thesis is blown away and we nominate actual leftists who run on a leftist platform. In 12 years with demographics etc even Hillary wouldn't have lost this election
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
gohmak posted: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. It's been rolling around in my head for a couple days but when I try thinking about the actual words it sounds so loving stupid but here goes: Democrats have a message problem more than a policy problem, whereas Republicans have a policy problem more than a message problem. Republicans convinced rural working class folks that the mills all closed due to onerous regulations, taxes, and migrant workers and promised that cutting taxes, deregulating industry, and deportations would just cause fountains of money to erupt from the ground. Fountains of money from the ground sounds awesome, jobs coming back sounds awesome, those guys are in government they must know what the cause is, right? No, they lied, and any benefit got trapped at the 1% and never came back down. Democrats explicitly want to throw bricks of money to poor people (including poor rural people) and use big chunks of federal money to bring actual heavy industry to areas it had abandoned - just different industries from the mills and poo poo that had been there before, by taxing the fuckers who'd stolen it in the first place. They chose to run on a platform of metropolitan social issues and failed to successfully talk about how the bricks of money policies would help the guy who's been working at mcdonald's for 10 years after the factory in town closed and the job that paid him 3x as much got shipped overseas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:technocratic corporate CEO, the latter of which is exactly the sort of shithead who shipped away all the jobs in the rust belt. This person beat Obama on the economy in exit polling. Trump bragged about outsourcing jobs and stiffing contractors yet the rust belt still voted for him even though they thought Clinton was better on the economy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
speng31b posted:No, the best scenario is actually reordering the dem party so that the centrist thesis is blown away and we nominate actual leftists who run on a leftist platform. In 12 years with demographics etc even Hillary wouldn't have lost this election Yeah, but that is not a hope, hearts and minds strategy of making people vote Democat despite the party's flaws. That's a "make poo poo work" strategy, and requires more than hoping for the other party to poo poo the bed. Aka my point for the entirety of the thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
fknlo posted:This person beat Obama on the economy in exit polling. Listen, if you are going to keep banging on this, at least learn how to do basic algebra and calculate what those favorable Hillary ratings add to. Hint, her "victory" on economic issues amounted to a statistical margin of error.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Suckthemonkey posted:I agree that this guy is a fuckhead, but Bernie's one of the big people pushing for Ellison, which would seem to be a great opportunity for us to embrace underrepresented minorities and an economically progressive message. I really hope he gets it. it's a great opportunity, I agree. so far bernie and warren seem to be making good choices wrt trying to reform the dems
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
speng31b posted:No, the best scenario is actually reordering the dem party so that the centrist thesis is blown away and we nominate actual leftists who run on a leftist platform. In 12 years with demographics etc even Hillary wouldn't have lost this election Frankly, I think it's now much easier to do after the centrists took massive hit with this election.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Listen, if you are going to keep banging on this, at least learn how to do basic algebra and calculate what those favorable Hillary ratings add to. Hint, her "victory" on economic issues amounted to a statistical margin of error. So did trumps margin of victory in the swing states.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
fishmech posted: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. If they actually replace the constitution, I'm getting the gently caress out of there ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So did trumps margin of victory in the swing states. Of course. Thing is, Hillary didn't trounce Trump on economics. Half the population of swing states thought he was better than her. And since most people considered economy the most important factor, it was the pivotal area where Hillary ultimately lost despite getting a technical Pyrrhic victory. She wasn't able to pull ahead in her strongest area, and therefore she died the death of a thousand cuts by losing favorability in all the other, much smaller categories that would have been meaningless on their own.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
gohmak posted:According to Maher yesterday, democrats lost because of PC police and sticking up for Muslims. gently caress him. Get used to this. The window has shifted so far to the right you won't be able to believe it. Supporting equal rights and tolerance for Muslims is about to become an extreme-left minority position that no major political figures hold. The new debate will be "gently caress over Muslims/Latinos and help the poor" vs. "gently caress over Muslims/Latinos AND the poor". Bernie is already making moves towards this position (although its more like "ignore the muslims and work with the racists")
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Yeah, but that is not a hope, hearts and minds strategy of making people vote Democat despite the party's flaws. Seems like a good strategy to me. It will let us nominate some good economic and social progressives, who will win. It's hard to predict what the Republicans will do with the state of things now but one thing's certain - between now and 2020 they will arm an actual progressive candidate with a loving arsenal of winning material.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
One thing I’m keeping in mind is that even if this had gone the other way, 2016 was only ever going to get us a continued check on the GOP and gradual, minor improvements through the courts and bureaucracy. A hypothetical Sanders Presidency, while I would have loved it, wouldn’t have changed our inability to actually enact law or overcome GOP sabotage through budget constraints. At worst, the GOP could have turned 2020 into a referendum on left-populism as a whole by pointing out that none of Sanders platform was ever enacted. How do you tell people you’ll bring back jobs and improve healthcare when even at our most delusional the best we hoped for was razor-thin Senate control? All the while, the GOP would remain hungry in off-year elections so long as they can assign blame to a Democratic president. That actually scares me even more than where we are now. Imagine a 2020 defeat, with an even hollower Democratic party. We have a chance to change that now. This is a nightmare scenario, but at least we’re being forced to grapple with our terrible weaknesses downballot. The Democrats may not be able directly obstruct the way the GOP has, but we can still fight the many local battles that are coming. We need to have a presence in support of every strike, loudly protest every attack on civil rights and utterly refuse to accept that the will of a minority of voters constitute the entirety of who we are as a country. I don’t know who we’ll end up rallying around, but there will be plenty of fights to figure that out. I admit, I supported Hillary because I thought once in office she’d be able to hold the GOP in check and build on Obama’s admittedly flawed successes. I understand now that holding the line until the demographic cavalry solves our downballot problem for us was foolish. That’s on me, and I’m perfectly content with getting dressed down over it. The same is true for many of those who legitimately loved Hillary and are still reeling from this. This failure is on her and her circle, but her supporters in my experience are ready to follow the Sanders Bloc going forward. My hope is that we can leverage the odd utility of being “outsiders” to finally regrow the party from the bottom up, and when the time comes, not repeat the mistakes of Obama’s first two years. I firmly believe this soul searching is what we need right now, and the apparent progressive revolution within the party can be the start of something great, so long as we don’t end up with our own Ted Cruz sabotaging us with purity tests. A good friend of my family just lost his bid for the state legislature, and he’s already asking younger voters, and me, what he could have done differently (apart from running as Democrat in Indiana). It’s a start, and while the U.S. Senate races two years from now will be rough, there are a lot of other races beneath those where we can demonstrate a comeback. Sorry for the wall of text. I guess I really just need something else to think about that isn’t conservatives banning taxes via constitutional convention.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Isn't that viral tweet about state legislatures wrong, though? IIRC there are a bunch of states on that map listed as red that actually have split chambers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
And yes Keith Ellison would be a great choice for DNC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:It's been rolling around in my head for a couple days but when I try thinking about the actual words it sounds so loving stupid but here goes: Democrats have a message problem more than a policy problem, whereas Republicans have a policy problem more than a message problem. I feel like it's worth mentioning that the proverbial "closed down mill" has been gone for 30-50 years at this point depending on area. They already didn't get the mill during George W Bush, they often also didn't get it back during George HW Bush or Reagan. "The old mill" has been gone often for longer than the people in question had "the mill" actually up and running during their lives. It's had so much time to become the ideal past that nothing's ever going to replace it. Because nobody remembers things like "the mill actually only paid a lot of the workers barely above minimum wage, and that wage wasn't high then either" or "the mill's healthcare benefits were poor or nonexistent, but I was 22 then so it didn't matter". Often they don't choose to remember that "the old mill" of their town didn't even employ many people in the small town - a lot more were employed by stores and general small service businesses that relied on there being way more people in town back in the day. The real problem is often that your small town really relied on having a bunch of small time family farms around, often before WWII, and as those gradually lost their ability to sustain people they moved away to the cities or suburbs in search of more typical jobs. And when your small town loses that surrounding amount of customers for local business (even if it's at franchise stores, that's still employment) a lot of that local business has to close for lack of customers. Then that means more of the smallholders can't/won't bother to stick around etc. "The old mill" might have been the last major employer in the town, but when the town was doing well it was far from the most important employer - and that's the real problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
speng31b posted:Seems like a good strategy to me. It will let us nominate some good economic and social progressives, who will win. It's hard to predict what the Republicans will do with the state of things now but one thing's certain - between now and 2020 they will arm an actual progressive candidate with a loving arsenal of winning material. Excuse me, but where will this "winning material" come from? We're living in a post-fact society and you know it. Breitbart isn't going to report on the horrorshow of upcoming abuses. How will the right-wing majority possibly know what to be upset about?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
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. DWS wasn't thrown out because she was a big meanie, she was thrown out because she was an egotistical moron who would work against the DNC and its constituents if it meant she could hold on to power and publicity for one more second.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Get used to this. The window has shifted so far to the right you won't be able to believe it. Supporting equal rights and tolerance for Muslims is about to become an extreme-left minority position that no major political figures hold. Where is there any evidence that this is happening. I'm all for fighting against racism and backlash, but there has to be evidence of this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Get used to this. The window has shifted so far to the right you won't be able to believe it. Supporting equal rights and tolerance for Muslims is about to become an extreme-left minority position that no major political figures hold. No, it hasn't and no, the conversation isn't about loving over minorities now. The wide response to Trump's election has been an embrace of populism AND anti-racism, aside from a few very loud morons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:Where did he say that?? Oh his show. The whole episode is on youtube. I like Bill but he's definitely off on some things, like his obsession with Islam.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:Where is there any evidence that this is happening. I'm all for fighting against racism and backlash, but there has to be evidence of this. Do you need a scientific study conclusively proving racism is still a critical problem in the US or something?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Get used to this. The window has shifted so far to the right you won't be able to believe it. Supporting equal rights and tolerance for Muslims is about to become an extreme-left minority position that no major political figures hold. bill maher has always been a huge islamophobe though
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
speng31b posted:Yes, voters who stay home because they aren't energized should be sufficiently energized by the message of gently caress the plutocrats and make a living wage. If that being coupled with "and black people and immigrants get a living wage too" depresses anyone then gently caress them. Considering they voted Obama. I think they can be convinced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Get used to this. The window has shifted so far to the right you won't be able to believe it. Supporting equal rights and tolerance for Muslims is about to become an extreme-left minority position that no major political figures hold. How exactly is Bernie "making moves towards this position"? Last time I checked the man has thrown his weight behind a muslim as DNC chairman.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Do you need a scientific study conclusively proving racism is still a critical problem in the US or something? There's a big difference between "race is a huge issue in the US" and "anti-racism is now a fringe belief". The latter is loving hysterical.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So did trumps margin of victory in the swing states. What the gently caress? There is no "margin of error" in actual election results. There is in polling. Apples and oranges.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dabs posted:No, it hasn't and no, the conversation isn't about loving over minorities now. The wide response to Trump's election has been an embrace of populism AND anti-racism, aside from a few very loud morons. Reminder that an election won't override population trends: http://www.pewforum.org/2016/05/12/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/ Even the Republicans got more supportive of minority issues, and even if stuff gets rolled back, there will be a wide support for the next Democratic administration to reinstate the lost milestones. More than a third of GOP sympathizers supports gay marriage. That's pretty much where the Dems were just 15 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/797531284784422913
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
actionjackson posted:Oh his show. The whole episode is on youtube. I like Bill but he's definitely off on some things, like his obsession with Islam. His insistence that arheists are oppressed and GMOs are unsafe is incredibly annoying as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
disjoe posted:DWS wasn't thrown out because she was a big meanie, she was thrown out because she was an egotistical moron who would work against the DNC and its constituents if it meant she could hold on to power and publicity for one more second. Again, it's not about what she or Weiner did, but the strength they brought in their argumentation and not putting up with GOP poo poo. I was arguing in favor of democrats who call out the crap and don't get talked over. We don't have anyone like that anymore. Don't say Bernie because his 1% of the 1% of the 1% speech isn't it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
actionjackson posted:Oh his show. The whole episode is on youtube. I like Bill but he's definitely off on some things, like his obsession with Islam. I'm watching through it now and I haven't seen anything about it yet. I'll say it again: If there is anti-muslim anti-PC backlash among liberals I'll be the first one there to fight against it. But lets not waste energy on a problem that doesn't exist. Who What Now posted:Do you need a scientific study conclusively proving racism is still a critical problem in the US or something? Yep, wow you caught me, I'm OBVIOUSLY a racism denier. e: Ok I got to the part where he said the stuff about Islam and PC stuff. Yea that's wrong. I don't like what he said. That said, there needs to be a tiny bit of self reflection on the issues affecting working class whites and the perceived notion that we aren't working towards helping them. The feeling of "racism against white people" is real and even if it can be absolutely repudiated with facts and discussion, there needs to be a way to make everyone feel included. I have no idea how to do it, but it needs to be addressed. Rexicon1 fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Nov 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:15 |
|
|
This is why I have no faith in the Left's ability to react and learn the right lessons from this. I have hundreds of people on this group on Facebook who live in Philadelphia and refused to vote because "voting is about making the best choice for the country and not the lesser of two evils." Their reaction to losing PA by less than 1% is to agree that they were right to not vote and then to do this: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2016 21:20
|
|
