WhiskeyJuvenile posted:

Why didn't anyone lie to them before? Good question

WhiskeyJuvenile posted:

Why didn't anyone lie to them before? Good question

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

Should I post that picture of you saying "gently caress rural people, hth" ?

1-800-DOCTORB posted:

I would throw in John McCain as a wild card as well.

Kobayashi posted:

Also except for lol gently caress the coal miners, retraining for the green economy and infrastructure investment were regular applause lines from the stump speech. But naw, Clinton didn't have the rhetorical delivery of a young, charismatic black man, so #MAGA wins.

boner confessor posted:

yes please post the screenshot from over a year ago that you creepily saved for some reason

please wipe it clean with a damp rag before you post it

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

Because those minorities are their nextdoor neighbors, they deal with them personally even if they never bother to learn their names and need to arrive at some kind of peaceful detente with them so long as they're allowed to vote for city councilmembers and walk outside their ghettos the half-mile to the yuppie district. Back in history when that wasn't the case, liberals were uh considerably less solicitous of the wellbeing of black folks. Nothing forces them to be so accommodating of people out past where the metro lines run who have their own political system and their own, often mutually exclusive, needs and priorities. The left has a history of not knowing how to deal with rural folks, who don't fit into their big efficiency-through-centralization plans, except by suppressing or annihilating them. That poo poo dates back to Lenin, and the pre-Marx urban-bourgeois antecedents to the left were no better.

PhazonLink posted:

Why the gently caress would you trust Regressive sentators that all voted Donnie to vote against Donnie now?

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

Oh yea i forgot Hillary giddily exclaimed they were gonna put the coal miners out in the street like a loving dog

On live television

boner confessor posted:

uh are you so young that you forgot about the nearly $800 billion dollar stimulus in 2009 that republicans largely hated because democrats were doing it

Venuz Patrol posted:

better yet, post it every day. that'll show us

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

I mean, really, it seems like you guys still insist that rural socioeconomically disadvantaged people should be ground up and turned into soylent

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

To give them some semblance of hope for jobs

Venuz Patrol posted:

do you remember when republican-held legislatures refused to take multiple billions of dollars to build modern rail lines in their states? probably would have created some good construction job opportunities for the rural areas the tracks would have passed through, too

if i think really hard i bet i can figure out a reason that's actually obama's fault too though

boner confessor posted:

terrible plan, fat content is too high

Random rear end in a top hat posted:

So wait, are you advocating that we just straight-up lie to people about their future economic prospects, or do you just not understand why that just isn't going to happen ever?

Nothing says 'I have respect for rural people and want to help them' like tricking them into voting for you and then not actually doing the things that would help them because doing that would involve explaining that you lied to them in the first place.

Lightning Knight posted:

Sometimes I wonder if the entire structure of the US governmental system designed for a rural pre-industrial society is literally incapable of allowing us to address our present crisis. We can't do anything in a system where overwhelmingly overrepresented conservatives deny any attempts to fix problems and aggressively create new ones.

Lightning Knight posted:

Sometimes I wonder if the entire structure of the US governmental system designed for a rural pre-industrial society is literally incapable of allowing us to address our present crisis. We can't do anything in a system where overwhelmingly overrepresented conservatives deny any attempts to fix problems and aggressively create new ones.

Kobayashi posted:

I honestly thought we were on the verge of a new era of incrementalist consensus, that despite the problems you outline, the country would creak forward at a frustratingly slow pace. But at least it would go loving forward, drat.

Ginette Reno posted:

Everyone should be living in cities anyways. Better for the environment to not have all these bullshit suburbs and cars and poo poo.

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

I mean, really, it seems like you guys still insist that rural socioeconomically disadvantaged people should be ground up and turned into soylent

Random rear end in a top hat posted:

So wait, are you advocating that we just straight-up lie to people about their future economic prospects, or do you just not understand why that just isn't going to happen ever?

Nothing says 'I have respect for rural people and want to help them' like tricking them into voting for you and then not actually doing the things that would help them because doing that would involve explaining that you lied to them in the first place.

Lightning Knight posted:

We can give them jobs in the short term, albeit not the jobs they particularly want. I suspect the distinction won't matter as much if we get it done and they aren't as poor anymore however.

Venuz Patrol posted:

ooh, you should try photoshopping other people's usernames and avatars onto there. really crank up the passive aggressive sniping to the next level

Lightning Knight posted:

Ok, fair enough. Seems like the answer to that, as is typical, is that we have to fight to make sure people care anyway though.

I just really think we need to be pushing to change the system to make it easier for us to win. Democratic presidents don't make everything happy and wonderful but every Republican president sets back the country 30 years and if we don't do as much as possible to deny them power we're not trying hard enough. Luckily, unlike them we don't have to deny anyone the right to vote to do that. Reducing the overrepresentation of rural areas would massively help us though.

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

I don't think you're going to ever make city boys who don't own a car and think chicken comes from the grocery store 'care' about country folk except maybe in the same sense they could be convinced to care about Afghan women and Iraqis chafing under Saddam's yoke. They're never going to spend much time, like, talking to some Okie to see what they want and get to really appreciate them as a person, except as a self-serving political ploy because the electoral college obligates them to humor people from the empty states sometimes, and that's not a slam on liberals or city people specifically that's just human beings being innately kinda tribal and only really able to prioritize the interests of those they know personally. Acknowledging that affluent urban liberals are simply one more insular, self-interested tribe within the US; one whose advance has generally (and specifically, recently) come at the expense of their countrified counterparts, rather than the ubermensch who has objectively determined the greatest good of all mankind through listening to NPR and merely has to drag the rest of the world kicking and screaming into the light, would go a long way towards establishing a peacable coexistence, but I wouldn't count on the folks in flyover country to lay down their edge in the EC in anticipation of the coming Grinchesque change of heart.

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

And still these people voted for the person that did just this.

Lightning Knight posted:

We can give them jobs in the short term, albeit not the jobs they particularly want. I suspect the distinction won't matter as much if we get it done and they aren't as poor anymore however.

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

Acknowledging that affluent urban liberals are simply one more insular, self-interested tribe within the US;

boner confessor posted:

you're complaining bitterly about, like, 2% of the population

most people who live in cities aren't that wealthy, and way more people live in suburbs

Lightning Knight posted:

A lot of this goes for minorities too though. Hell a fair amount of the rural poor are minorities.

I just feel like dismissing it because it's hard and it might lead to people getting ignored is a bad set of reasons. Most things are hard and they already get ignored.

Random rear end in a top hat posted:

This is at least a reasonable strategy. It still runs into the problem of one party telling them to eat their vegetables (vis-a-vis private-sector jobs not coming back) while the other offers candy for breakfast, lunch and dinner, but at least it's a better strategy then "hey, we should get a midget, too!"

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

you are quite thoroughly insane, median incomes in any major metropolitan area are a multiple of what they are in cow country.

I'm really not interested in another NYT-grade whine about how $400k/yr is not really rich, really, because Brooklyn has a high cost of living

Lightning Knight posted:

I mean the message can and has historically worked. What worries me is that when Obama ran his opponents didn't leverage explicit racial hatred of immigrants in their messages and that the spiteful message of "gently caress these people who came here to not be poor" would win out.

Crazy Ted posted:

And in response to the outcry, said she'd work hard to give these newly unemployed people Broadband Internet.

fits my needs posted:

Hahaha, wow. Well can't say I was expecting that much hatred to be generated from airing out some concerns as a Muslim. Well, I still feel my concerns are valid that my rights will be on the chopping block in exchange for economic populism, but a lot of people feel like the economic anxieties of rural whites are more valid than mine.

Thanks for the free av I guess lol.

quote:

My point is I think most minorities will see through the message of economic populism raising all boats because it seems like white people usually get most of the boats in the first place.

fits my needs posted:

But, but Bernie-san is saying we should try to get economic populist stuff pass! Who cares about the racism and misogyny? This is why Bernie Bros claim of having equal or greater minority support for their fearless leader than Hillary is laughable.

Random rear end in a top hat posted:

That is precisely what I'm talking about, when one party is willing to lie and blame everything on minorities it's kind of hard to win no matter what your message is, but especially if your message is one that voters don't want to hear (that those coal/manufacturing/etc. jobs just aren't coming back and that government jobs are their best bet).

Stereotype posted:

No one here hates you or is expressing hatred towards you. You just really seem like you're living in a completely delusional fantasy-world and are not reading or comprehending anything anyone is telling you. I understand that a Trump administration is a huge concern for someone who is a Muslim (which you've mentioned you are like 8 times), but you legit sound like a paranoid schizophrenic and are lashing out at everyone who agrees with you and wants to stop the exact thing you're worried about.


Literally everyone in the thread agrees with you on this. Literally not a single person disagreed all day. I don't understand why you feel so attacked here except that you're reading some other make-believe forum in your head.

You've been CONSTANTLY posting garbage like this:


And pretend like Bernie didn't say he will fight racism and misogyny super specifically a billion times.

You aren't listening to anyone and you deserve that loving title you crazy idiot.