|
Lol at this. The sad thing is, if Trump was a Democrat people would believe it. http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-bizarre-birther-twist-claims-trump-is-pakistani/
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
Accretionist posted:Jesus christ. So, as a white guy who'd like to volunteer for economic progressivism, I can go gently caress myself, huh? How is that helpful? If you think that someone saying "we're going to continue to fight for minority voices and if you don't like that you can go gently caress yourself" is something you can't support, then yes, you can go gently caress yourself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Jesus christ. So, as a white guy who'd like to volunteer for economic progressivism, I can go gently caress myself, huh? How is that helpful? White guys don't have some inherent right to be the center of attention. No one is saying that white males are going to be marginalized and ignored, but LK is absolutely correct that white men shouldn't expect to have their issues become central planks in future campaigns if they aren't willing to provide equal time to issues that minorities care about. How is acknowledging that other people matter equally at all controversial to you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:He won by doing this, so what's the strategy to counter it. How do you change the narrative so that his whining is pointed out for what it is. I mean, I guess the media could make a better case about Trump's danger to the free press when a sitting President is actually threatening it, but probably not. The lesson they'll learn coming into 2020 is to spend equal time talking about the Trump presidency's problems and the Clinton email scandal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:I think millions of americans are prepared to donate their blood, organs, or other bodily tissues to keep RBG alive for as long as she wants how much power do RBG, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kegan have to keep too much crazy poo poo from happening when they're outnumbered?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:If you think that someone saying "we're going to continue to fight for minority voices and if you don't like that you can go gently caress yourself" is something you can't support, then yes, you can go gently caress yourself. I do like it. They didn't say that. With the line, "if you even want to pretend to be progressive," they equated subordination of white men to progressivism. That's the goofy rider that piqued my attention in #5. Paradoxish posted:White guys don't have some inherent right to be the center of attention. No one is saying that white males are going to be marginalized and ignored, but LK is absolutely correct that white men shouldn't expect to have their issues become central planks in future campaigns if they aren't willing to provide equal time to issues that minorities care about. How is acknowledging that other people matter equally at all controversial to you? Poverty isn't a White Male issue. And they said, " if you aren't prepared to fight just as hard for ... Black Lives Matter, go home, we don't need you." I've been poor most of my life, and I only have so much time and money. I'm willing to volunteer time for poverty and class issues, which means I'm the enemy and need to go home. Edit: I don't care if you're BLM-only. Why should you care if I'm poverty-only? I'm not out to stop and exclude you. Why are you out to stop and exclude us? And holy loving poo poo anti-poverty is not a white-male vanity project Accretionist fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:White guys don't have some inherent right to be the center of attention. No one is saying that white males are going to be marginalized and ignored, but LK is absolutely correct that white men shouldn't expect to have their issues become central planks in future campaigns if they aren't willing to provide equal time to issues that minorities care about. How is acknowledging that other people matter equally at all controversial to you? I don't give a gently caress if people are voting democrat solely because they care about the environment and don't spend much time on minority issues, or only support BLM and don't give a poo poo about college debt forgiveness, or vote democrat solely because of women's health issues and don't give a gently caress about the environment as long as, holistically, all of these people have a voice and the agenda moves forward for all. But hey, we like losing, and we like stupid arguments in the new democratic party so let's all just be stupid losers forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Keith Ellison becoming the head of of the DNC would be a really magnificent giant gently caress you to the racist class in america, It's not the be all end all, but it's a really good opening statement for how the Democrats will learn their lesson and change their direction. At least that's what I hope, I would really hate to see the democrats refuse to learn their lesson or change positively and end up like the labour party in britain who are so enamored with centrism they're willing to kill their own party to prevent it shifting to the left.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Wraith of J.O.I. posted:This is a great question, because I feel it is so apparent to me that he is the world's biggest loving whiner, but then his supporters see the same thing and cheer it as speaking some weird truth to power. This seems to be part of the broader messaging problem on he left, and I'm not really sure what to do about it. Because they are whiners too. Hell, so am I sometimes. Not like Trump or people that constantly post poo poo on FB or whatever, but when someone is whining about the same poo poo you it sounds a lot more like support and confirmation than whining.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Wraith of J.O.I. posted:This is a great question, because I feel it is so apparent to me that he is the world's biggest loving whiner, but then his supporters see the same thing and cheer it as speaking some weird truth to power. This seems to be part of the broader messaging problem on he left, and I'm not really sure what to do about it. I think the biggest problem is the Trump was a Schrodinger's candidate, whose positions were so vague and dubious that anyone could look at him and assume he only really believed in whatever positions they wanted him to believe, hence the "oh he's not REALLY gonna cut off my healthcare" woman in this thread earlier. That's good for running as a candidate, but now that he's president he can't hide behind vague promises and plausible deniability anymore. He's going to implement policies that at least one part of his base will not be happy about. If he goes ultra-conservative, the goal is to scoop up the crossover voters who thought they weren't getting just another empty Republican suit. If he goes secret Democrat (not likely), the goal is to depress hardcore right-wingers who wanted Full Facism Now
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I do like it. They didn't say that. With the line, "if you even want to pretend to be progressive," they equated subordination of white men to progressivism. That's the goofy rider that piqued my attention in #5. It's only subordination compared to where white men used to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I do like it. They didn't say that. With the line, "if you even want to pretend to be progressive," they equated subordination of white men to progressivism. That's the goofy rider that piqued my attention in #5. The message is one of equal time. Why do you believe that your issues should completely monopolize a future campaign? e: an edit! He's not saying that economic issues should be excluded, he's saying that they matter and that minority issues matter just as much QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mkblyth/status/797887877640130560
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Ok I hit the anger/acceptance stage at work. Here is my big huge pointless effort post no one will read.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:00
|
|
why do you hate white straight men???" shut the gently caress up. Don't even. White straight men already get to be the center of the universe every other place. If you even want to pretend to be progressive don't you start that poo poo here.
|
QuarkJets posted:The message is one of equal time. Why do you believe that your issues should completely monopolize a future campaign? I don't. Why do you think I do?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I do like it. They didn't say that. With the line, "if you even want to pretend to be progressive," they equated subordination of white men to progressivism. That's the goofy rider that piqued my attention in #5. You just equated "sit down and listen some of the time" with "subordination of white men" so really gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Keith Ellison becoming the head of of the DNC would be a really magnificent giant gently caress you to the racist class in america, It's not the be all end all, but it's a really good opening statement for how the Democrats will learn their lesson and change their direction. I don't think that's going to happen here. Labour is hosed because they're literally two ideologically different factions fighting for control of the same banner (and because Corbyn is an overly polite spineless coward and not the British Bernie people wanted him to be). I don't really get the impression that there is much ideological conflict between the Clinton wing and the Bernie wing of the Democratic party, just a difference in strategy and implementation. Party leaders like Schumer and Reid backing Keith Ellison seems like the Dem establishment saying "yeah we hosed up, hopefully your plan works better"
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Wraith of J.O.I. posted:This is a great question, because I feel it is so apparent to me that he is the world's biggest loving whiner, but then his supporters see the same thing and cheer it as speaking some weird truth to power. This seems to be part of the broader messaging problem on he left, and I'm not really sure what to do about it. Start eating red meat to get your testosterone levels up, beta male.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Poverty isn't a White Male issue. And they said, " if you aren't prepared to fight just as hard for ... Black Lives Matter, go home, we don't need you." I've been poor most of my life, and I only have so much time and money. I'm willing to volunteer time for poverty and class issues, which means I'm the enemy and need to go home. No, poverty isn't a white male issue, but you should probably listen to minorities (and, hell, loving economists) when they tell you that the poverty faced by minorities does not stem from the same place as white poverty. Yes, the issues of inequality faced by the white working class are affecting minority workers too, but white workers are not affected by the systemic issues that are also holding these people down. Nobody is calling you the enemy. We're telling you not to complain when issues that don't directly affect you get the spotlight for a while, because that does make you the enemy. edit- quote:I don't. Why do you think I do? Then why did you take umbrage at LK's post? Maybe the lesson here is to stop being offended by things that don't affect you and aren't directed at you. Paradoxish fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Nov 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
It's impossible to know but supposedly there is only like a 30% chance that one of Kennedy and RBG dies in the next 4 years. I hate so much that the Republicans bullshit Supreme Court strategy worked. They're monsters for establishing that precedent into our government. That said if we find ourselves in the same spot we have to abuse it, because there being two different sets of rules for democrats and republicans is not working. I'm glad the democratic leadership isn't seeking to delegitimatize Trump's presidency but we need to beg, borrow, and steal every advantage we can to bury these fuckers before they ruin the world. As far as I'm concerned that odious gently caress Mitch McConnell is first against the wall.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:If you think that someone saying "we're going to continue to fight for minority voices and if you don't like that you can go gently caress yourself" is something you can't support, then yes, you can go gently caress yourself. Paradoxish posted:White guys don't have some inherent right to be the center of attention. No one is saying that white males are going to be marginalized and ignored, but LK is absolutely correct that white men shouldn't expect to have their issues become central planks in future campaigns if they aren't willing to provide equal time to issues that minorities care about. How is acknowledging that other people matter equally at all controversial to you? For what it's worth, I don't think the explanations given following the bolded sections are unreasonable, but just opening with "White straight male progressives are not the future of our movement" is pretty disempowering, and I don't think it's necessary to disempower white straight males in order to empower everyone who doesn't fall into under that umbrella. Everyone needs to feel empowered, or nobody ends up motivated for the cause. I agree that white straight male progressives should not be the foundation of or hold all of the leadership positions in the movement (as is mentioned afterward), but I think they absolutely need to be a part of it and they absolutely need to feel welcome, just as everyone outside of that description. A lot of what was said afterward seems like it pretty much could just fit the bill of 'Don't be a dick, and make sure you take a chance to hear out those who are different from you," which I think is fine but not necessarily as dismissive. I agree that they should be expected to fight for minority causes as well, as mentioned, with the flipside being that minorities should be expected to take the economic interests of the wider working class (white and non-white) seriously (to the extent that they are not explicitly racist or otherwise in opposition) as well. The attitude of the larger post seems to be pretty dismissive of industrial labor economic interests as a whole, and I don't know how we're going to convince people outside of the current progressive bubble to join the cause if that's their perception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:The message is one of equal time. Why do you believe that your issues should completely monopolize a future campaign? The reaction that needing equal time would result in losing campaigns with the democrats is puzzling. So what, the black community will continue supporting the democratic party if it drops BLM in favor of focusing solely on white issues?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I do like it. They didn't say that. With the line, "if you even want to pretend to be progressive," they equated subordination of white men to progressivism. That's the goofy rider that piqued my attention in #5. I was being terse because I am tired and annoyed. I'm sorry you are poor. I'm sorry you don't have time to care about the issues of minorities. My point is several fold: * White men have been leading the Democrats by and large for their entire existence and Hillary, while a woman, was still an old rich white person. Obama was successful because he was young, charismatic, ran on a message that appealed to white working class people, and was a black man so minorities felt they could trust him. He didn't do what he needed to do once elected, but his candidacy is a valuable lesson and model. * White progressives have a history of abandoning minorities when it counts, and downplaying minority issues. Unfortunately, there are wars besides the class war. As I said, increasing the minimum wage won't stop the police from murdering black people. Look up MLK's thoughts on "white moderates." You might be a true progressive who cares about minorities, but many feel that we would drop them at the first sign it was convenient. By emphasizing minority voices - and minority candidates - we can assuage their fears without sacrificing our message. See: Keith Ellison. * We're not trying to exclude you. Reread what I said. I said sometimes. I said listen. White straight men all too often dominate every conversation. Black people experience poverty too. There is common ground between a BLM supporter and a rural white man if they could stop and listen to each other. But for that to work, you have to be willing to meet us half way. * I don't really want you to gently caress off if you don't have the time or energy to devote yourself to all of the progressivism and be the most woke. I have that privilege. You clearly don't. What I do want you to do is not ask us to make social justice take a back seat to economic reform, or vice versa. Both are important and we can fight for both, so long as we keep sight of our end goals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:You just equated "sit down and listen some of the time" with "subordination of white men" so really gently caress you. I don't think that's what they said. Paradoxish posted:Then why did you take umbrage at LK's post? Maybe the lesson here is to stop being offended by things that don't affect you and aren't directed at you. Social justice is successfully being mobilized to defeat economic progressivism and those are some of the talking points. There's no reason to a priori assume conflict and the necessity of pre-emptively stamping that poo poo down. There's was a lot of, 'I'd fight poverty except that I understand white privilege isn't more important than gays and minorities,' from the Clinton camp during the primary campaign and I'm still seeing it in circulation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I don't. Why do you think I do? Because you're arguing against statements advocating for equal time
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Suckthemonkey posted:For what it's worth, I don't think the explanations given following the bolded sections are unreasonable, but just opening with "White straight male progressives are not the future of our movement" is pretty disempowering, and I don't think it's necessary to disempower white straight males in order to empower everyone who doesn't fall into under that umbrella. Everyone needs to feel empowered, or nobody ends up motivated for the cause. I agree that white straight male progressives should not be the foundation of or hold all of the leadership positions in the movement (as is mentioned afterward), but I think they absolutely need to be a part of it and they absolutely need to feel welcome, just as everyone outside of that description. A lot of what was said afterward seems like it pretty much could just fit the bill of 'Don't be a dick, and make sure you take a chance to hear out those who are different from you," which I think is fine but not necessarily as dismissive. You are absolutely right that the tone I took was probably counter productive. It was really aimed at brogressives who want to go full no war but the class war and abandon identity politics and if you aren't aware of the schism I understand the confusion. I thought the fact that I kept stressing that we need to bring back white working class people - and that I talked about unions - made it fairly clear we would be stressing labor economics. Maybe not industrial labor econ, but labor econ all the same.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Because you're arguing against statements advocating for equal time I meant to put attention on the framing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Boo, I didn't vote for Trump. And I endorse minority and LGBT issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Boo, I didn't vote for Trump. owns that you chose the latter half of your redtext to correct, lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Right, but there are attractions to rural living. It's loving pretty out there man. Have y'all actually seen America? We let the robber barons mine and log all the beautiful places when those people could've spent less time breaking their backs running a gift shop. I realize that's not ~fulfilling~ but it also doesn't disappear on you when the mine closes down. what does any of this have to do with the fact that less populated areas generate less service sector jobs 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Tatsuta Age posted:owns that you chose the latter half of your redtext to correct, lol Honestly, after the Democratic primary, it just sort of fades into the background.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:I don't think that's what they said. Hm, let's look at the thing which you quoted: quote:White straight male progressives need to learn to sit down and shut the gently caress up some of the time, and to listen to minority voices. Seems they did say that!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:what does any of this have to do with the fact that less populated areas generate less service sector jobs Because I think that tourism to pretty places rejuvenated by other forms of economic renewal could play a part in long term sustainability?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I thought the fact that I kept stressing that we need to bring back white working class people - and that I talked about unions - made it fairly clear we would be stressing labor economics. Maybe not industrial labor econ, but labor econ all the same. The tone of your post was fine, dude. I've been stressing the need to bring working class people (white or not) into the fold in this thread too, but that doesn't mean you have to sugarcoat your rhetoric or coddle people who think that "identity politics" are somehow preventing economic reform. Part of bringing these people back in as allies is targeted outreach that makes it clear that candidates care about them too, but that doesn't mean social justice messages have to be subordinated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Because I think that tourism to pretty places rejuvenated by other forms of economic renewal could play a part in long term sustainability? that's already a thing, currently right now in the present day. it's not like you can make scenic areas more scenic to attract 20% more tourists, and there are huge chunks of rural america which aren't scenic enough to sustain a viable ecotourist industry also it has nothing to do with the thing i was talking about, which is that areas with low population density generate less service sector jobs due to lack of customers. even if you hire a hundred additional park rangers they only generate so much demand for dog walkers, ice cream cake makers etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Wraith of J.O.I. posted:Is this not the thread for Trump tweets anymore? I don't think I've seen these posted. What could the impacts of his tweets be on the world? A bad tweet could move markets, or sell NYT subscriptions... Thinking more about this, wondering how the Times giving front-page, above the fold coverage to any Trump tweets accusing them of lying or making things up and then showing why it's bullshit would go down? Could start with this tweet in tomorrow's paper
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
The Puppy Bowl posted:It's impossible to know but supposedly there is only like a 30% chance that one of Kennedy and RBG dies in the next 4 years. There's so much denial in the left right now! I've also been told on this very site that Trump (70s) is very likely to die of old age in the next 4 years. Just wanting something doesn't make it so. People in their 80s die or retire due to ill health all the time. Even if RBG lives to 100, she isn't likely to want to keep working because very elderly people get very easily fatigued even if they are in great health for their age. Also you need to think "8 years" not 4, because most presidents get re-elected. It's a fantasy to suppose that the electorate will realize Trump is a mistake in only 4 years. It was already obvious to anyone with a brain; it isn't likely to get any more obvious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:The tone of your post was fine, dude. I regret writing that post because now it's the center of attention.  But I agree. boner confessor posted:that's already a thing, currently right now in the present day. it's not like you can make scenic areas more scenic to attract 20% more tourists, and there are huge chunks of rural america which aren't scenic enough to sustain a viable ecotourist industry Well yeah, tourism won't work everywhere. I don't know what to do about the super tiny podunk towns of sub a hundred people. I really, really don't, in terms of long term sustainability.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Well yeah, tourism won't work everywhere. I don't know what to do about the super tiny podunk towns of sub a hundred people. I really, really don't, in terms of long term sustainability. *cough* welfare *cough*
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
How powerless was the opposition in Germany and Italy during the rise of Hitler and Mussolini? And how does the Democratic Party of today compare?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 21:25
|
|
