|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Ya gotta give 'em a taste first. Can't shove the whole steak down their throats all at once. now I just want steak nationalize the beef e: beefEd Balls
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
Pon de Bundy posted:Hillary lost to Donald trump . The first time , okay , the really charismatic first time black president , okay she can deal with that , but you lose to Donald trump how can you recover ? She's only human 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 06:34
|
|
|
Pon de Bundy posted:Hillary lost to Donald trump . The first time , okay , the really charismatic first time black president , okay she can deal with that , but you lose to Donald trump how can you recover ? She's only human nice try lizard person
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Also the fact that you think economic concerns aren't an issue when nobody turned out because of them means you are dumb too. See, you would really have a better case for your claim there is no danger of abandoning social issues in favor of exclusively catering to white working class voters, if you didn't, without exception, continually fail to comprehend any difference between not abandoning social issues, and abandoning economic issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:See, you would really have a better case for your claim there is no danger of abandoning social issues in favor of exclusively catering to white working class voters, if you didn't, without exception, continually fail to comprehend any difference between not abandoning social issues, and abandoning economic issues. When did I ever claim that you could abandon social issues?? ?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
Fiction posted:When did I ever claim that you could abandon social issues?? ? When the gently caress did I ever say economic concerns aren't an issue? And don't try to pull out me using economic concerns to point out how stupid the idea of abandoning gun control is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
You don't need the economic anything to get your lack of a point across deak.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:it is pretty gross at how they court their donors over the people catching up on the thread but this reminded me of multiple instances of posters saying that young voters don't have "skin in the game" and thus should be ignored~
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:25
|
|
"
|
it also reminded me of a black woman being literally hissed at by rich whites lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
I saw this on twitter, does anyone have a source? it seems unfortunately believable 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
obvious disclaimer: the things shes saying arent untrue, and the causes she lists are important: the problem she had was the impression that she was running away from economic concerns at every possible opportunity and making excuses for it
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
blamegame posted:I saw this on twitter, does anyone have a source? it seems unfortunately believable I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
"Would it end racism?" became weaponized during the primaries as the ultimate tool to discredit any inconvenient argument. There's nothing wrong with asking that, but it shouldn't be used as a disingenuous rhetorical device to shut down your opponent and make them look like a bigot if they don't comply.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? my impression is, and i didn't follow the campaign as closely as a lot of people, but my impression is that that's the sort of rhetoric that made it hard to take the notion that clinton was concerned about the economy seriously. it's not that what she says its untrue, its that to me, in the context of the rest of her campaign, it seems like just another piece of a kind of evasive pattern. it might not be the most interesting thing to everyone else who's already made up their mind on the election and what happened, but i'm trying to put together the pieces of what went wrong with clinton's messaging using concrete examples, and that seems like one, assuming its true
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? my impression is that it implies we can only do one or the other
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
i mean it's pretty much the go-to example for using social justice as a shield to protect your moneyed interests
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? we can't do X and Y, we can only do X or Y but I mean I'll totally do Y if you want me to I'm just saying, we can't do X and Y so you better pick
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
blamegame posted:I saw this on twitter, does anyone have a source? it seems unfortunately believable It would, though, keep those said minorities from being exploited to the point of barely scraping by while enduring the bumps of a poorly regulated economy. The DNC really failed to understand that intersectionality connects with class too this last election.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
Yeah fair enough. I don't see anything inherently wrong with emphasizing social justice that way, but in the context of the whole campaign I can see the issue. Also a bunch of old white folks using race as a bludgeon against one another is inherently silly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
also it was part of her stupid attack that Bernie only gave a poo poo about white people
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:41
|
|
|
Clinton didn't want to be called out for making an incredibly weak commitment to any kind of Wall Street correction or regulation, which is why she immediately distracted the line of thought onto social issues.big juicy nectarine posted:It would, though, keep those said minorities from being exploited to the point of barely scraping by while enduring the bumps of a poorly regulated economy. It's not like they failed to recognize it, it's more that they succeeded to marginalize it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:41
|
|
|
big juicy nectarine posted:It would, though, keep those said minorities from being exploited to the point of barely scraping by while enduring the bumps of a poorly regulated economy. Of course they realize that, but the DNC would never say anything that could make the banking sector uncomfortable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Of course they realize that, but the DNC would never say anything that could make the banking sector uncomfortable. Well then it's on par with the Bush administration probably knowing the difference between Shi'ite and Sunni but then completely failing to foresee the sectarian insurgence in Iraq in terms of terrible overlooking that led to a disaster.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:43
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? Pivot and implicit ad hom. They worked hard to shut down economic progressivism during the primary by juxtaposing it against race, gender and LGBT issues. They cast it as a white male vanity project to be rejected if you care about social justice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
my understanding of intersectionality is that it relies a lot on theories about the way bad economics especially hurt and marginalize the people covered under so called identity politics, so to act as if the two are separate issues that deserve different prioritization is actually falling into the trap she accused her opponents of falling into. but clinton's position as a representative of moneyed interests meant that she essentially always had to retreat from any kind of legitimate economic message. but i'm sure this has been discussed at length
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/802992597660790784 good thread on twitter imo
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/802992597660790784 this dude is fire https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/802997143548153857
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:30
|
|
|
http://qz.com/840337/the-us-government-is-already-quietly-backing-out-of-its-promise-to-phase-out-private-prisons/ Also gently caress this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:31
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/802992597660790784 https://twitter.com/jakebackpack/status/802994784457498624 every space on the dice sprays my face with deadly acid, but (it's a p. good thread though)
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:32
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:http://qz.com/840337/the-us-government-is-already-quietly-backing-out-of-its-promise-to-phase-out-private-prisons/ All that private prison money donated to Clinton was well spent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:http://qz.com/840337/the-us-government-is-already-quietly-backing-out-of-its-promise-to-phase-out-private-prisons/ goddammnit obama i'm glad his legacy is in ruins at least
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
blamegame posted:but clinton's position as a representative of moneyed interests meant that she essentially always had to retreat from any kind of legitimate economic message. The discussion was generally Hill Folk demanding "proof" that she'd favor moneyed interests rather than just taking their loads of money in return for nothing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 11:39
|
|
|
Liberals literally turned to "Greed is good" as a moral maxim to help them pick a candidate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 11:44
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/803033642545115140 Christ it would be amazing if he pushes for investigations and they uncover gop fraud
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Christ it would be amazing if he pushes for investigations and they uncover gop fraud
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? You can replace nationalizing the banks with literally any other policy, including those specifically designed to address the issues raised, and the statement would still be true. Its disingenous bullshit that manages to contain no information of value but it can be distilled down to "we will not do anything because it will not fix everything" - with the real message being that a vote for Hillary is a vote for things continuing on exactly as they are now GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 14:26 on Nov 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
speng31b posted:Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? Yes, this is actually a perfect description of that Hillary Clinton quote, very insightful  HRC was saying that there is no point in breaking up the big banks because it wouldn't end racism; that is literally "circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit", good reading
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You do realise the only way to get a pristine voting record is to not have a voting record, right? Well his legislative record was renaming a single digit amount if post offices sooo
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:53 |
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? "Racism isn't real because it doesn't affect me, unlike economic cloudiness" - white socialists who are having trouble finding work
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 15:14
|
|