Baloogan posted:

Baloogan posted:

Segmentation Fault posted:

This is a pretty good Twitter thread imo:

https://twitter.com/SShackford/status/798730155266969600

There's tons of fearmongering going on among the left IMO and its distracting from actual fights for change

gtrmp posted:

ironic that he's telling "LGBT" people that they don't need to worry, considering that trans people are absolutely going to see their legal rights undermined and stripped away under Republican rule

and I doubt very much that a Republican-dominated federal government would do much of anything in response to anti-gay discrimination by the individual states

but white-collar gay men like himself will be fine, and state-level discrimination would only ever happen in those backwards red states and not in his own state, so as far as he's concerned there's nothing to worry about

Baloogan posted:

quote:

THE woman who failed to stop the world’s largest military power falling to a rabid reality TV star has admitted feeling a bit sorry for herself.

Hillary Clinton, who ran a presidential campaign so empty and entitled it allowed a tiny-eyed maniac to become leader of the free world, admitted that afterwards she felt so sad that she could not properly enjoy ice-cream.

She continued: “My husband, Bill – you remember Bill, he was president for eight years which is why I thought it was fair I should be – was worried about me.

“He was like ‘Hey, it’s a sunny day, we’re wealthy enough to survive the coming depression and not Muslim enough to get sent to the camps, let’s play some frisbee!’

“I couldn’t stop moping about that job I’d really set my heart on and didn’t want to go outside, even though rationally I knew I should before the drone-enforced curfews begin.

“But I realised that millions of ordinary Americans were literally making GBS threads themselves and bucked myself up.

“Now I’m cheerful again and planning our retirement in Paraguay where we’ll avoid the civil war, environmental catastrophe, and famine. Life is good!”

quote:

Filmmaker Greg Palast says the states of Michigan, Arizona, North Carolina, and Ohio were stolen in this election

Baloogan posted:

gtrmp posted:

ironic that he's telling "LGBT" people that they don't need to worry, considering that trans people are absolutely going to see their legal rights undermined and stripped away under Republican rule

and I doubt very much that a Republican-dominated federal government would do much of anything in response to anti-gay discrimination by the individual states

but white-collar gay men like himself will be fine, and state-level discrimination would only ever happen in those backwards red states and not in his own state, so as far as he's concerned there's nothing to worry about

tadashi posted:

Is there an Uncle Tom like name for gay white men who don't really give a gently caress about anyone as long as they're making money?

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN5DZQ41Evo&t=1188s

According to the reporting of Greg Palast, there's more than enough evidence to indicate that the results in several states were stolen through use of the cross-check system. A system that overwhelmingly disqualifies black, Asian, & Latino votes because of the similiarities between their first & last names with people from other states. Even if two individual people have different middle names, or titles, they may still be denied having a valid ballot. They can also use the cross-check list to selectively target enough people for disqualification, to keep the results from appearing too skewed.

tadashi posted:

Is there an Uncle Tom like name for gay white men who don't really give a gently caress about anyone as long as they're making money?

tadashi posted:

Is there an Uncle Tom like name for gay white men who don't really give a gently caress about anyone as long as they're making money?

tadashi posted:

Is there an Uncle Tom like name for gay white men who don't really give a gently caress about anyone as long as they're making money?

docbeard posted:

I think the point of highlighting potential (and actual) cases of voter suppression and the effect it had on the election isn't so much about reversing the election results (which is even less likely than an electoral college upset, and that's basically in Seth Abramson BERNIE IS TOTALLY GOING TO WIN FOR REAL AND I WILL PROVE IT pipe dream territory). And it's not about absolving the Clinton campaign for their hubris.

It's more about making sure that voter protections are a big part of our big populist progressive uprising or whatever the gently caress we're doing.

MysteriousStranger posted:

It's about not having to change poo poo about "creative urban professional" economics or assuming we win automatically due to demography. Because reversing our economic program since the 90's, to a New Deal type program, is worse than the party imploding for the people that matter in the cities and industries that matter.

MysteriousStranger posted:

It's about not having to change poo poo about "creative urban professional" economics or assuming we win automatically due to demography. Because reversing our economic program since the 90's, to a New Deal type program, is worse than the party imploding for the people that matter in the cities and industries that matter.

MysteriousStranger posted:

It's about not having to change poo poo about "creative urban professional" economics or assuming we win automatically due to demography. Because reversing our economic program since the 90's, to a New Deal type program, is worse than the party imploding for the people that matter in the cities and industries that matter.

MysteriousStranger posted:

It's about not having to change poo poo about "creative urban professional" economics or assuming we win automatically due to demography. Because reversing our economic program since the 90's, to a New Deal type program, is worse than the party imploding for the people that matter in the cities and industries that matter.

ChickenOfTomorrow posted:

guys I'm concerned

Internet Explorer posted:

I live in a fairly big city, do I looked up my local Dem party and saw they had a meeting in a few days (today). It's worded as an "Executive Board" meeting, but they have it every month with nothing else on the schedule so I figured that was just their normal meeting. Wanting to be sure, sent an email to their info@ address. No response after 3 days. Gee, I wonder why these groups are having trouble bringing in new blood!

ChickenOfTomorrow posted:

guys I'm concerned

docbeard posted:

I think the point of highlighting potential (and actual) cases of voter suppression and the effect it had on the election isn't so much about reversing the election results (which is even less likely than an electoral college upset, and that's basically in Seth Abramson BERNIE IS TOTALLY GOING TO WIN FOR REAL AND I WILL PROVE IT pipe dream territory). And it's not about absolving the Clinton campaign for their hubris.

It's more about making sure that voter protections are a big part of our big populist progressive uprising or whatever the gently caress we're doing.

GOOD TIMES ON METH posted:

Since you are already concerned take a look at this

https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus/status/799242791507243008

Internet Explorer posted:

Hey, ah... Just an FYI, our "economic program since the 90's" is not working.

MysteriousStranger posted:

But we are just close enough to having protection drones. We can use these to repel the starving flyover hordes. Think of it like ancient city states ruling over the rural trash, we are close to there and that's where things are going anyways. And nobody will care if we drone rednecks to death.

MysteriousStranger posted:

Basing it on being data driven lets you pay poo poo tons of consultants. Those consultants are upper income professional class social liberals that live in the richest cities in the US, those cities are Democratic power centers. It funnels money to the right people in the right places, which is the entire point of the party. It's not a bad thing.

MysteriousStranger posted:

Doesn't work like that. Blue cities are donor areas. Red rural is the moocher area. If you want to balance the budget go after the mooching poor, aka white flyover. And on this team blue will always win regardless of the party in power. We have the money, we have the industry, ya'll just labor for us and suck our money.

MysteriousStranger posted:

The point of labeling them racists isn't entirely that they are racist. The point of labeling them racist is to make the un people, that way we don't have to feel bad about screwing over their communities to make coastal cities richer, because they are bad people and thus it's OK to hurt them, because they deserve it. It's OK that banks destroyed their communities. Because they are racist, and Goldman Sachs funds liberals in big liberal cities and is full of well educated social liberals, and Goldman Sachs is a partner of the Human Rights Campaign and really came through for gay marriage. Plus, criticizing bankers is racist, because what you actually doing is criticizing jews because you are a racist.

If you don't realize that this has been the entire point of liberalism and the democratic party since the 90's, you haven't been paying attention.

quote:

All the 1% zip codes in the US are blue. All the richest zip codes are blue. All the zip codes that hold the industries that destroyed the middle class are blue.

If you don't believe in loving the poo poo out of the poors in flyover to make the richest zip codes richer you shouldn't be voting Democratic. That's the entire point of the party. Smash flyover to make NYC bankers and San Fran tech bros richer, and if possible give those same bankers and bros a bonus if they outsource the jobs of lower income whites in flyover. Because creative professionals rock and manual labor sucks and is full of racists. So our job should be to funnel as much as possible to the creative professionals so they can live an even nicer life in urban playgrounds.

The fact that people don't realize this about the Democratic party is hilarious. It is the party of the predators.

MysteriousStranger posted:

Sanders needs to get the gently caress out of the Democratic party. He's offering economic policies that help the white working class, aka racists and bigots, at the expense of rich white social liberals. That's not tolerable anymore and anybody who supports that is just as bad as a Trump supporter. Populism is just as vile as racism and sexism and the enemy of social liberalism. Even worse, if we did get votes form it we'd be diluting minority votes with racist votes, anybody who advocates getting more white working votes is signing up with bigotry.

Sanders economic desires are dead in a socially liberal party, and the white working class is dead in one as well. Good riddance to both of them as well.

MysteriousStranger posted:

It's not her management skills. It's that the Democratic party sucks and liberalism is at core a bunch of assholes punching down.

As a party and a political ideology we are the elite. All the richest zip codes, all the richest companies and industries, all blue! And those same zip codes and industries are the ones that destroyed the rest of the country so well off social liberal could do even better. We conduct all of our "good works" in ways that are really about us. Hollywood actors, musicians, fancy catered events, all while patting ourselves for how awesome it is and having a great time.

The very things that well off liberals love about liberalism is why it doesn't loving sell. But without those things liberalism wouldn't be worth it. The party and the urban educated eventually have to come to grips with that. Either give up the pretense of giving a poo poo about people and just live it up while making fun of people and accept the fact that we are the predators and problem with this country.... or give up all the fun, tax the ever loving poo poo out of ourselves, move jobs out of our community, and actual deliver on what we claim to be.

bump_fn posted:

taking your ball and going home helps nobody. also


remember that you agree with these people more than you disagree. they're not your enemy

loquacius posted:

I dunno if it's necessarily a crackpot theory but if you can attribute it to the research of one specific person who you can call by name it's not quite at the level of "ACLU lawsuit" yet. It's still breaking. Gotta become generally-accepted fact first.