|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:You ever heard of the term "the buck stops here"? That's not an answer, and quite frankly you seem to care more about your own ego than you do about the suffering of other human beings. In fact, you've done barely anything but gloat about it and insult or even make poo poo up about Democrats ever since the 8th, because god forbid other people care about minorities before your glorious revolution.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
Hollismason posted:Things would have been better if Obama had acted like a Chicago Politician and just started loving Republican's over hard core when they wouldn't step in line. rahm Emanuel 2020
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-registry-immigrants-policy-kris-bobach-reinstate-wall-a7420296.html Specifically, a registry for immigrants from Muslim countries. Which is still garbage. The Department of Homeland Security also rejected it once already as, more or less, redundant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:No one said 'appeal to everyone'. You didn't address the second part of my question at all, which is "How should Democrats frame their messaging to these selected white working class members in the face of blatant lies by Republican candidates, including that their dreams will come true (among many, many others), in such a way that their policy-heavy messages won't be tuned out by the sort of person who can be convinced to vote for Donald Trump (e.g.) based solely on the strength of whatever nebulous lie has been told to them?" Also, how did you get from "appeal to everyone" which I put in quotes because you said it to "appeal to whatever part of the white working class that used to vote for Democrats." How do you reconcile shaping a message to a group of voters who voted for Donald loving Trump (lol) while also maintaining the rest of your voter coalition?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
disjoe posted:I didn't just pull that example out of thin air either, CBS Sunday Morning went to COAL Country (God help them) and asked them who they voted for and why. One woman was a single mother (of like four!) who didn't vote. The woman voting for Trump that *knew* he would bring back all the coal jobs was depressing as gently caress. Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think the order we need to be considering is one that's relatively likely. Ie., What if Trump orders a nuclear launch against Aleppo? What is Aleppo?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:Ron Johnson ran an ad (now missing from YouTube apparently) attacking Russ Feingold for voting against "giving law enforcement the tools to keep Americans safe from international terror". People want the illusion of security, the PATRIOT Act and things like a Muslim Registry (what the goddamn gently caress) create that illusion very easily. The most hilarious(?) thing is people who are in favor of those things then turn around and talk about how gun control legislation creates an illusion of security. A Wizard of Goatse posted:I don't think anyone except the most bad-faith neocon shill is pretending that the Bush administration didn't start eroding our rights bigtime post-9/11, even the Bushies I've spoken to just quibble on whether Obama was still worse because he kept and expanded the security state, but Democrats have been fully enthusiastic participants in that and like clockwork when challenged on this from within the party wash their hands of their own ongoing policy with a "Bush did it first!!!" Saying "what about the politicians who continue and expand the programs" is also whataboutism. It ends up absolving the initial offenders (by making it the new guy's problem, just like the GOP did to Obama on things like the financial crisis, Hurricane Katrina, Iraq, 9/11, and so on) and also has the effect that it creates the occasional bullshit pie-in-the-sky idea that if you vote in the party who put the poo poo in place in the first place that they'll pull a Nixon and do something accidentally good by dismantling it. You are right that we should hold our politicians accountable for their bullshit, but there's a fine line to walk between holding the Democrats responsible for expanding the surveillance state instead of getting rid of it like they said they would, and giving them sole blame for the problem existing. Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Skex posted:Where did I say anything about ignoring those challenges? What I said is that the we need to stop ignoring the economic inequity. This is really well said. Thank you for being so articulate about the points that we who aren't fans of the Clintons and new dems are trying to make.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:rahm Emanuel 2020 gently caress. I know its a joke but gently caress. gently caress! e: fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:That's not an answer, and quite frankly you seem to care more about your own ego than you do about the suffering of other human beings. In fact, you've done barely anything but gloat about it and insult or even make poo poo up about Democrats ever since the 8th, because god forbid other people care about minorities before your glorious revolution. Sir, I am a disabled minority who's part of the working class This is the only place where I can gloat 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
Skex posted:Where did I say anything about ignoring those challenges? What I said is that the we need to stop ignoring the economic inequity. Friend, saying "this is the primary problem, all others are secondary" inherently minimizes them, which we cannot do. Skex posted:And yes they are all caused by economic inequity, racism in America has always been a tool of the powerful to maintain their power and that power is based on economic inequity. You show an extreme ignorance of history to think otherwise. White privilege was created specifically to keep poor whites in line. it's the classic divide and conquer strategy. Poor whites are co-opted into the system by giving them "privilege" which provides them some advantage over the group who should be their natural allies, just like some slaves were given privileges to bind them to their masters over other slaves. Just as managers are bound to the executives in the corporate world by giving them power over the grunt workers.  I'm a contact period and early-colonial period historian, tell me more about how I'm "extremely ignorant" of history. Economic factors have always been key, and divide-and-rule was the original reason for creating the distinction between indentured servitude and slavery. But the point is that modern racism has long since become independent of that calculating decision; it is now its own force, which while closely related with economic injustice, is also not caused by it.Skex posted:It's all about power imbalances and economics is all about power, so extreme concentrations of wealth are by definition extreme concentrations of power. And while it's true that eliminating such imbalances would not instantly resolve all other inequities ignoring those imbalances is just paying lip service to the needs of minorities while leaving the underlying cause of the inequities unaddressed. Which will only lead to other inequities in the future in an ultimately futile game of whack-a-mole. I am not advocating for ignoring economic imbalances, literally the opposite, why fall back on attacking that point? Literally my entire argument is that you cannot reduce pluralism or economic justice to a sub-plank of the other because that will inevitably lead to failure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:People want the illusion of security, the PATRIOT Act and things like a Muslim Registry (what the goddamn gently caress) create that illusion very easily. Do you think the immediate priority here is launching some kind of Nuremberg tribunal for the initial signatories to the PATRIOT act, or getting sitting politicians to stop the NSA from monitoring your every word for thoughtcrime that the President's star chamber can legally try you in secret and sentence you to death for? A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Sir, I am a disabled minority who's part of the working class 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Sir, I am a disabled minority who's part of the working class Owning an agricultural plot in a foreign country makes you a member of international capital and a class-traitor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Things would have been better if Obama had acted like a Chicago Politician and just started loving Republican's over hard core when they wouldn't step in line. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:Do you think the immediate priority here is launching some kind of Nuremberg tribunal for the initial signatories to the PATRIOT act, or getting sitting politicians to stop the NSA from monitoring your every word for thoughtcrime that the President's star chamber can legally order your assassination for? I had added the answer to your question through an Edit but i'll restate it here. Yes we should hold sitting politicians accountable for their bullshit or walking back promises, they are after all the only ones who can really do anything about it at this point. But at the same time we have to make it absolutely 100% loving clear who was responsible for this poo poo so that Republicans can't just get elected back in and do it all over again because "well warrantless wiretapping and NSA overreach was a Democrat idea, honest". There is a super-fine line to walk there and I don't know if anybody has the skill at being that nuanced or even if the general public would care about that nuance. gently caress's sake there are people who blame Obama for a Hurricane that happened 3 years before he was President.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Specifically, a registry for immigrants from Muslim countries. Yeah. It's hosed up and reprehensible but it's little different from the program under Bush and unless I'm missing something in that article it's only talking about Muslim immigrants and visitors and not actual Muslims citizens. Yes slippery slope I know. ITS BAD. But things like this have been defeated in the infant stages before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:You have a weird way of trying to tack singular blame onto liberal politicians, giving the actual president from 2002 a free card on this one. Obama could have disbanded the whole thing in 08 but he didn't. Instead he doubled down and codified it into law and as a result an orange lunatic now has the keys to every piece of personal information in existence. So yeah, gently caress Obama.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Yeah. It's hosed up and reprehensible but it's little different from the program under Bush and unless I'm missing something in that article it's only talking about Muslim immigrants and visitors and not actual Muslims citizens. Yes slippery slope I know. ITS BAD. But things like this have been defeated in the infant stages before. The first step in defeating it in early stages is to be solid in your opposition. You came off as....wishy washy on whether this program was a problem because that program is something we've been living with already, where are the gas chambers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:rahm Emanuel 2020 Not my
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
 Is there anyone on that list that isn't completely reprehensible?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Owning an agricultural plot in a foreign country makes you a member of international capital and a class-traitor. I actually got that land with my disability money and currently it is inhabited by a poor Ecuadorian family that can now grow a crop and sell it in the markets. And I was born in that country so it's not foreign to me lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:Then why in god's name are you so much more invested in attacking Hillary and establishment Democrats than the people who want to murder you? Criticizing is not attacking. I criticize because I want them to be better. I'm trying to better the Democratic Party to what I think is a party for all minorities and the working class, not rich folk. That's the Republican Party.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Obama could have disbanded the whole thing in 08 but he didn't. Instead he doubled down and codified it into law and as a result an orange lunatic now has the keys to every piece of personal information in existence. The Trump administration whistleblowers are going to be amazing. If we and they live that long.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:The backbone of the military is the NCO. Yeah and NCOs are generally cynical angry assholes. They're the ones who serve on military juries- ever wonder why the conviction rate under UCMJ is much higher than in the civilian judicial system? I'm not saying the military would go along with anything Trump orders, but placing blind trust in the military to do the right thing in a moment of uncertainty/moral ambiguity is a risky bet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Obama could have disbanded the whole thing in 08 but he didn't. Instead he doubled down and codified it into law and as a result an orange lunatic now has the keys to every piece of personal information in existence. So he dismantles it and in 2012 Romney/Huckabee/JEB!/Perry/Gingrich (pick your favorite) is elected on the wave of "The Muslim Hordes are infiltrating this country and we need to re-establish the PATRIOT Act", what now? Like do you honestly believe Democrats would win a messaging war about how the PATRIOT Act and Warrantless Wiretapping were bad? You could sell this country that getting stabbed through the eye with a needle every day would prevent terrorism and people would gladly do it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The Trump administration whistleblowers are going to be amazing. If we and they live that long. Whole agencies find themselves staffed entirely with sleeper whistleblowers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Yeah and NCOs are generally cynical angry assholes. They're the ones who serve on military juries- ever wonder why the conviction rate under UCMJ is much higher than in the civilian judicial system? As a Marine NCO, my experience was a different one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:So he dismantles it and in 2012 Romney/Huckabee/JEB!/Perry/Gingrich (pick your favorite) is elected on the wave of "The Muslim Hordes are infiltrating this country and we need to re-establish the PATRIOT Act", what now? Like do you honestly believe Democrats would win a messaging war about how the PATRIOT Act and Warrantless Wiretapping were bad? You could sell this country that getting stabbed through the eye with a needle every day would prevent terrorism and people would gladly do it. You're missing the point, at his drum circle and/or young libertarians weekly coffee and grindr meeting they are certain it would be very popular and not at all politically harmful to do X, Y and Z.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:I had added the answer to your question through an Edit but i'll restate it here. Yes we should hold sitting politicians accountable for their bullshit or walking back promises, they are after all the only ones who can really do anything about it at this point. But at the same time we have to make it absolutely 100% loving clear who was responsible for this poo poo so that Republicans can't just get elected back in and do it all over again because "well warrantless wiretapping and NSA overreach was a Democrat idea, honest". There is a super-fine line to walk there and I don't know if anybody has the skill at being that nuanced or even if the general public would care about that nuance. gently caress's sake there are people who blame Obama for a Hurricane that happened 3 years before he was President. Were a Democratic administration to roll back NSA total surveillance and the FISA courts there is no danger they would end up getting the blame for creating them in the next election, I know people here don't want to acknowledge the logic of the electoral system when it's unfavorable to them but this pretense that voters are just crazy fuckin' random morons who flip a coin on what to believe and you can't do anything about it has got to stop. The Democrats currently own the NSA and FISA and the whole totalitarian package because they've spent their time in power supporting them; they're thoroughly bipartisan policy that plays poorly to the public. Like a lot of other things the leadership of both parties very much wants and very much doesn't want to be publicly associated with (corporate welfare, your job getting sent to China, the tax code being lenient on their billionaire buddies) they play this little game where they each pretend their role in perpetuating it doesn't count because the other guy's also done something to promote it, so really when you think about it it's his fault, and their partisans who mostly get their news from party-leaning sources go for it every single time, and no further questions get asked. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
greatn posted:Alfred's speech was bullshit. The theif's motivation was obvious. The theif didn't want foreign governments bribing corrupt officials for control of his country. "Some men just want to watch the world burn" Alfred says, and in the next sentence admits that it was he in fact that actually burned down the forest to kill this guy. I was referring to the whole thing with the mobsters in their desperation turning to a man they didn't quite fully understand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
A lovely Reporter posted:Then why in god's name are you so much more invested in attacking Hillary and establishment Democrats than the people who want to murder you? "Why are you so invested in making a case against the sort of divide and conquer tactics that have let our party's privileged establishment continually ignore and sideline vitally needed reforms to the ongoing detriment of our party's political prospects and the country as a whole? The opposition doesn't agree with you about these things at all and has no respect for your opinion, so wouldn't it be better to just focus your efforts on telling people how terrible they are?" I don't think this is a super compelling argument myself, but I'm a(n inadequately) salaried white dude so feel free to ignore me
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
LGD posted:"Why are you so invested in making a case against the sort of divide and conquer tactics that have let our party's privileged establishment continually ignore and sideline vitally needed reforms to the ongoing detriment of our party's political prospects and the country as a whole? The opposition doesn't agree with you about these things at all and has no respect for your opinion, so wouldn't it be better to just focus your efforts on telling people how terrible they are?"  Th...this...
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:Were a Democratic administration to walk back NSA total surveillance and the FISA courts it is incredibly unlikely they would end up owning them in the next election, I know people here don't want to acknowledge the logic of the electoral system when it's unfavorable to them but this pretense that voters are just crazy fuckin' random morons who flip a coin on what to believe and you can't do anything about it has got to stop. The Democrats currently own the NSA and FISA because they've spent their time in power supporting them; they're bipartisan policy that plays poorly to the public, and like a lot of other things the leadership of both parties very much wants and very much doesn't want to be publicly associated with (globalism, corporate welfare) they play this little game where they pretend their role in perpetuating it doesn't count because the other guy's also doing it, so really when you think about it it's his fault, and their partisans who mostly get their news from party-leaning sources go for it every single time, and no further questions get asked. If you honestly think that anybody, Democrat or further left, is capable of winning a messaging war that starts with "The PATRIOT Act and warrantless wiretapping did not actually do a drat thing to keep us safe and are in fact infringing on the rights of innocent Americans" 8 years ago or even now, then you are hopelessly naive. I'm not even saying we don't hold people accountable for not doing what they said they'd do (we definetely need to do that more so that they actually feel their actions have consequences), I'm just trying to point out how without proper messaging it would be political goddamn suicide to do so, and ultimately might not accomplish anything especially since Republicans have no problem creating laws to gently caress people in the name of "security", and who's going to replace those Democrats that "have left us defenseless against infiltration from our enemies?" take a guess. Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Welp, looks like the Republican Legislative Strategy is to pass a giant omnibus reconciliation bill very quickly. The bill will be filibuster proof because it is a budget reconciliation vote and it will have so many components that it will be difficult to attack any specific aspect. It will also include a 2-year time bomb that will end Obamacare, but not until after the 2018 elections.quote:Republicans would quickly vote, through a reconciliation bill, to dismantle the law’s subsidies. They could do this in a massive reconciliation bill that also advanced other priorities, like a large upper-bracket tax cut, cuts in spending on anti-poverty programs, defunding agencies that regulate Wall Street, Carbon and Pollution Emitters, and other priorities. But the defunding of Obamacare would be delayed for two years, until after the 2018 midterm elections, to shield the GOP from the political impact. In the meantime, Trump will deliberately impair the law’s functioning through administrative action, so that the exchanges lost customers rather than gained them. Two years later, the participation rate in the exchanges will have plummetted low enough to limit the political damage and optics of ending them entirely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Getting my passport renewed so I can take advantage of PRC ten year entry visa
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Just what they WANT us to think! https://twitter.com/business/status/798948028698816512
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Registration actually is a step toward the final solution. Like, how, based on history, is registration of a religious group not a step toward the final solution? Oh so now registration is a step towards elimination.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Welp, looks like the Republican Legislative Strategy is to pass a giant omnibus reconciliation bill very quickly. The bill will be filibuster proof because it is a budget reconciliation vote and it will have so many components that it will be difficult to attack any specific aspect. It will also include a 2-year time bomb that will end Obamacare, but not until after the 2018 elections. But I thought the democrats gained some seats in both houses of congress??
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:
Mike Lee lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
 at the centrists going "buh... buh... but the voters!" over the patriot act of all things. you know why people don't turnout? it's cause you're all too scared to actually stand for anything
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 20:09
|
|
