|
Boon posted:Why do you think this? Wow it's almost like racism is a systemic issue which might affect all those concerns for non-white people.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:03 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 08:42 |
|
fishmech posted:Oh you're one of those lunatics who thinks Literal Communism was going to poll well with Americans, glad to see you aren't actually making serious suggestions. Well HRC offered incrementalism. She lost.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:03 |
|
kaleedity posted:Good thing we elected trump instead Trump would for sure have been elected if he was running against an actual communist proposing actual communism. Condiv posted:hmm, bernie seems to be accomplishing things as we speak. last I heard hillary was off hiking in the woods after her defeat to a clown man. too bad incrementalism wasn't electable, huh? Bernie isn't anything close to an actual communist, so I'm not sure why you think he's relevant? Bernie was incrementalism as all hell, he wouldn't even advocate the people's ownership of the means of production! poo poo, he wouldn't even promise free college, just free tuition. Crowsbeak posted:Well HRC offered incrementalism. She lost. So did Bernie, so did literally everyone else who ran to be the Democratic candidate. fishmech fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Nov 12, 2016 |
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:03 |
|
Boon posted:Why do you think this? Source?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:04 |
|
^^ http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/10/29/chapter-4-top-issues-in-this-years-election-for-hispanic-voters/ JeffersonClay posted:Wow it's almost like racism is a systemic issue which might affect all those concerns for non-white people. Then why don't the the people affected by it state it as their number one priority? Boon fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Nov 12, 2016 |
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:04 |
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Clinton got a smaller percentage of the black and Latino vote than Obama did. Mostly due to black and latino men. Interesting, that.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:04 |
|
Lots and lots of liberals saying the election wasn't about economics just pure racism/sexism. I don't think liberals get what they're saying. If what they are saying is true then we might as well start getting ready for civil war part 2 or split the country into Ds/Rs because the country is going to stay divided.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:06 |
|
fishmech posted:Bernie isn't anything close to an actual communist, so I'm not sure why you think he's relevant? Bernie was incrementalism as all hell, he wouldn't even advocate the people's ownership of the means of production! who said anything about communism fishmech? also, bernie's relevant cause he's doing things. making endorsements, rebuilding the dem party. unlike your do-nothing abuela
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:07 |
|
fishmech posted:Trump would for sure have been elected if he was running against an actual communist proposing actual communism. no one is actually asking for a real Communist Solution you nitwit.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:09 |
|
Boon posted:Okay - let's accept that this is 100% true. What does that mean, practically, moving forward? That we need to teach these people that their favorite phrase has actual meaning; All Lives Matter, not just white, middle-class ones.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:09 |
|
Condiv posted:who said anything about communism fishmech? also, bernie's relevant cause he's doing things. making endorsements, rebuilding the dem party. unlike your do-nothing abuela Ah, so you're incapable of reading posts. The conversation is about revolution vs incrementalism, and Bernie Sanders is firmly on the side of incrementalism. The things he's doing right now that you're jizzing over, are incrementalism.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:10 |
|
Boon posted:^^ Because the study gave them choices and the respondents ranked them. Racism was not one of the choices.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:10 |
|
Crowsbeak posted:Well HRC offered incrementalism. She lost. Bernie offered more, and he lost as well. Clearly incrementalism did better by every metric. Scent of Worf posted:Lots and lots of liberals saying the election wasn't about economics just pure racism/sexism. This is pretty much true at this point.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:11 |
|
fishmech posted:Ah, so you're incapable of reading posts. The conversation is about revolution vs incrementalism, and Bernie Sanders is firmly on the side of incrementalism. The things he's doing right now that you're jizzing over, are incrementalism. You are such a disingenuous piece of poo poo.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:12 |
|
JeffersonClay posted:Because the study gave them choices and the respondents ranked them. Racism was not one of the choices. Do you have literally any evidence at all that racism is the #1 issue for latino voters?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:13 |
|
Rexicon1 posted:It's almost as if no one is actually asking for a real Communist Solution you nitwit. That guy was mad that the Democrats have capitalist solutions and attitudes. If you're mad about capitalist solutions, you're asking for communist solutions - unless you're instead asking for some dumbass monarchist-feudalist stuff. But I sincerely doubt he wants that! Rexicon1 posted:You are such a disingenuous piece of poo poo. That's you, buddy.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:13 |
|
JeffersonClay posted:Because the study gave them choices and the respondents ranked them. Racism was not one of the choices. Well then let's look at one that DOES specifically address that idea - you'll find the result about half-way down the list. Even further down the list towards the bottom you'll find treatment of LGBT http://www.people-press.org/2016/07/07/6-hispanic-voters-and-the-2016-election/ I welcome any and all evidence you have that what you're saying is factual. Who What Now posted:That we need to teach these people that their favorite phrase has actual meaning; All Lives Matter, not just white, middle-class ones. Your opinions are frankly dangerous because you refuse to accept that people don't work and think like robots. You will not change anyone's mind by 'teaching these people' short of forcing integration and experience onto them. I'd love to hear your thought on how you'd propose to do that. The correct answer is to find what motivates people to a greater extent than racism and how to long-term guide society towards a path of societal identity rather than to magic the racism out of them but you're a loving idiot so. Boon fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Nov 12, 2016 |
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:13 |
|
Scent of Worf posted:Lots and lots of liberals saying the election wasn't about economics just pure racism/sexism. The country was born divided and will remain divided into the future. GOP dominance and Trump's presidency has emboldened racism in the short term and presumably will also entrench itself to economic concerns more deeply than they already have been in the future.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:14 |
|
fishmech posted:That guy was mad that the Democrats have capitalist solutions and attitudes. If you're mad about capitalist solutions, you're asking for communist solutions - unless you're instead asking for some dumbass monarchist-feudalist stuff. But I sincerely doubt he wants that! Can we split the difference, and have socialist solutions?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:15 |
|
fishmech posted:Ah, so you're incapable of reading posts. The conversation is about revolution vs incrementalism, and Bernie Sanders is firmly on the side of incrementalism. The things he's doing right now that you're jizzing over, are incrementalism. oh wow, where is this definition of incrementalism which encompasses everything up to communism fishmech? is this based on horseshoe theory? why should i have been able to assume that by incrementalist you meant everyone between stalin and hitler?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:15 |
|
Sharkopath posted:Yeah, I agree entirely and have been posting to this effect but this is where our personal opinions begin to differ because I am no longer allowing myself to underestimate the effect racism can have on the total electorate. Well, it's certainly true that racism was a huge factor. But even by going all out on the racism, Trump only managed to score a very narrow win and even that was only accomplished by him happening to say stuff that resonated well in the rust belt while Clinton completely blew it on messaging in those states. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I got the impression that the racism that allowed Trump to win was less of the "I hate the minorities and will vote to gently caress them over" kind and more of the "I'll vote for what sounds best for me and mine, even if it fucks over the minorities" kind of racism. I fully understand that there's not much difference of outcome for minorities between the two at the end of the day, but the important difference is that if this holds then the latter group can be appealed to come around to voting for the non-poo poo alternative, no racism required, which is kind of important when looking to the next election. Rexicon1 posted:One correction I want to make in this discussion. It's very possible that the economy will be booming in four years. The real metrics that we need to keep an eye on is income inequality, the size of the middle class and student debt burden. The rich people could be swimming in Scrooge McDuck money towers in four years and they will claim that Trump's candidacy was a rousing success by GDP standards. Maybe consumer spending will plummet but I'm sure business capital expenditures could make up for it. As a socialist I wouldn't consider the rich stealing even more from the working class to be a booming economy, but I see your point.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:15 |
|
Scent of Worf posted:Lots and lots of liberals saying the election wasn't about economics just pure racism/sexism. liberals were oblivious to the fact they're supposedly progressives who were offering status-quo instead of progressive policies when the status-quo is awful for millions of voters
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:17 |
|
Mister Macys posted:Trump won because he promised to make the lives of working class whites better, and the rich tax breaks. As has been stated before, this is objectively false. She was talking about economic policy early in the general campaign, and was promptly ignored for live feed of Trump's empty podium.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:19 |
|
What happens in 2018 when the jobs haven't come back and everyone's still poor as gently caress and Trump is like "I NEED MORE POWER TO DO ALL THAT poo poo I PROMISED" to the rurals?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:20 |
|
fishmech posted:That guy was mad that the Democrats have capitalist solutions and attitudes. If you're mad about capitalist solutions, you're asking for communist solutions - unless you're instead asking for some dumbass monarchist-feudalist stuff. But I sincerely doubt he wants that! Ok McCarthy
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:20 |
|
Condiv posted:oh wow, where is this definition of incrementalism which encompasses everything up to communism fishmech? is this based on horseshoe theory? why should i have been able to assume that by incrementalist you meant everyone between stalin and hitler? Describe how you believe Bernie Sanders isn't incrementalist. Is it just that Bernie Sanders' platform is where you think things should stop, with nothing beyond that? Rexicon1 posted:Ok McCarthy Why do you hate communism?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:20 |
|
This is a few pages back and got overlooked, but goddamn do I love this woman.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:20 |
|
Rexicon1 posted:One correction I want to make in this discussion. It's very possible that the economy will be booming in four years. The real metrics that we need to keep an eye on is income inequality, the size of the middle class and student debt burden. The rich people could be swimming in Scrooge McDuck money towers in four years and they will claim that Trump's candidacy was a rousing success by GDP standards. Maybe consumer spending will plummet but I'm sure business capital expenditures could make up for it. 1.) The economy has been "booming" for four years, but the only people that have gotten anything out of it has been the upper 10% 2.) Income inequality is already at historic levels. America has surpassed the gilded age of the twenties and thirties. 3.) The middle class has been shrinking as a percentage since 1967 4.) Student debt already rivalling medical debt 5.) The rich already have Scrooge McDuck money Where the gently caress have you been that you don't already know this? fishmech posted:That's you, buddy. He's right about you.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:21 |
|
Mister Macys posted:1.) The economy has been "booming" for four years, but the only people that have gotten anything out of it has been the upper 10%
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:23 |
|
fishmech posted:Describe how you believe Bernie Sanders isn't incrementalist. Is it just that Bernie Sanders' platform is where you think things should stop, with nothing beyond that? oh it's quite simple, during the primary, incrementalism was the word of the day as it was why bernie sanders was a fool. see his policy was neither pragmatic, nor was it incremental. that's why i believe sanders isn't incrementalist
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:24 |
Guy Goodbody posted:Jobs. They want jobs. Promise them jobs. Good jobs. Promise that if they elect you president you'll get them good jobs. So lie to them? Anyone who claims that they will bring the jobs back is a loving liar. All of you come across as caring more about the votes than the people casting them.
|
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:24 |
|
Spoondick posted:liberals were oblivious to the fact they're supposedly progressives who were offering status-quo instead of progressive policies when the status-quo is awful for millions of voters Or they assumed people who claimed to be progressive would still vote to protect the rights and lives of marginalized people even if they didn't get the total revolution thdy want an well we see how that worked out.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:24 |
|
fishmech posted:Trump would for sure have been elected if he was running against an actual communist proposing actual communism. I see we have different interpretations on that. Very well. I also thought you were suggesting Sanders was a commie. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Nov 12, 2016 |
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:25 |
|
Everyone please keep arguing about voter turnout while largely ignoring that this is the first post-VRA election and there have been incredibly deliberate voter suppression across the county, especially in states like Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina. It doesn't matter how awesome you think your message is going to be in 2020 (or 2018) if millions of your voters don't show up because they literally can't overcome the hurdles the GOP throw in front of them over the next several years. Strict nationwide voter ID requirements will gently caress over millions of people, especially when combined with targeted DMV closures and other poo poo we've been seeing.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:25 |
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:So lie to them? Anyone who claims that they will bring the jobs back is a loving liar. If a political party can't even pretend that it's policies will result in people getting good jobs, they deserve to lose.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:25 |
|
Condiv posted:oh it's quite simple, during the primary, incrementalism was the word of the day as it was why bernie sanders was a fool. see his policy was neither pragmatic, nor was it incremental. So you believe Bernie Sanders isn't an incrementalist because some guy was mean to you. That doesn't make him not an incrementalist though, especially since he expressly advocated for incrementalist policy both during the primary and in support of the general election.
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:26 |
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:So lie to them? Anyone who claims that they will bring the jobs back is a loving liar. What do you suggest? You know these jobs aren't coming back in the short-term. You know that traditional ideas of growing up and living an entire life in the same place is not tenable any longer. You know that rural communities will continue their decay and there is nothing any politician can do about it. So should we welcome the disintegration of the United States because we are unable to halt our slide into urban vs rural economies?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:26 |
|
Boon posted:Well then let's look at one that DOES specifically address that idea - you'll find the result about half-way down the list. Even further down the list towards the bottom you'll find treatment of LGBT 71% of latinos said racism was a major concern. 86% said the economy. The next poll item shows that Latinos prefer Hillary by 60 points on race, and by 16 points on the economy. So despite the fact that 15% less latinos think race is a major issue, those who do think it's a major issue are much more likely to vote for democrats. quote:correct answer is to find what motivates people to a greater extent than racism and how to long-term guide society towards a path of societal identity rather than to magic the racism out of them but you're a loving idiot so. What if racism is the primary motivating factor for many people? What if it's something we can't just ignore and expect our magical socialist utopia to appear?
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:27 |
Guy Goodbody posted:If a political party can't even pretend that it's policies will result in people getting good jobs, they deserve to lose. So pretending is enough. I almost want to laugh but it's too drat sad.
|
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:27 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 08:42 |
|
fishmech posted:So you believe Bernie Sanders isn't an incrementalist because some guy was mean to you. That doesn't make him not an incrementalist though, especially since he expressly advocated for incrementalist policy both during the primary and in support of the general election. hmm no, try again. here's an example of the term in use: http://www.salon.com/2016/01/26/i_have_had_it_with_naive_bernie_sanders_idealists/
|
# ? Nov 12, 2016 23:27 |