|
Cinnamon Bear posted:Obama thought about shutting down Gitmo but then he realized it wouldn't end racism. Congress legitimately hosed Obama here. They wouldn't approve what they needed to to bring the last Gitmo prisoners on the mainland so it's in a holding pattern right now. Now of course, Obama didn't really make it a point to continue fighting for the closure because it would be too much of a political liability. He would just mention it as a thing he would like to get done. It might have been nice to have the president using the bully pulpit more to berate Congress for not allowing us to regain the moral high ground. Less emphasis on "let's work together" and more on "you're a loving rear end in a top hat and you've betrayed our ideals."
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
loquacius posted:I am of the opinion that increased accountability for police would solve that issue more quickly and completely than Making Sure Each And Every Policeman Is Not Racist, on account of (a) it is actually feasible, and (b) if racist cops are not allowed to kill anyone they want for any reason with no repercussions, they at least won't be killing black people for no reason in the meantime More like some straight up insane berating of a poster who's personal life he will never truly know just to be used as a punching bag in a worst case assumption. Don't do this, it's obviously not conducive. gently caress the system though, for real. My teenage angst aside, the whole "we have to work within the system to change it" is so fundamentally and profoundly insane because the process has been repeating itself forever. It's broken, and it needs an overhaul all the way down. There's just so many problems that are overlapped that people are going in circles forever going "it's the economy, no wait, it's education, no wait it's social". That's all this thread will amount to at this point. How about ALL of it. Overhaul it all. Go get your voice heard in local meetings to address ALL of them and not just the ones that apply to you, which is also another factor in the whole scheme of things, everyone's experiences vary and can only put what they know to be true to themselves, which is why you'll have different paradigms over what should be prioritized. How about ALL of them~ The Wire and Bernie was right, one person can't change the game...
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:More like some straight up insane berating of a poster who's personal life he will never truly know just to be used as a punching bag in a worst case assumption. Trump seems like he's changing the game just fine
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
comingafteryouall posted:It might have been nice to have the president using the bully pulpit more to berate Congress for not allowing us to regain the moral high ground. Less emphasis on "let's work together" and more on "you're a loving rear end in a top hat and you've betrayed our ideals." I may be wrong, but my understanding was that Obama was planning to keep the Guantanamo prisoners indefinitely without trial; he was just going to move them to the mainland. If that is the case, Obama was never going to claim the moral high ground. But he could have looked as though he was; which i think was more important to him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:The Wire and Bernie was right, one person can't change the game... 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
blamegame posted: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. Well probably a combination of that, her refusal to commit to a 15 dollar an hour minimum wage, and her three college loan plans (all of which only applied to public loans) which respectively 1) Created unnecessary bureaucracy and means testing that after a decade or two would start causing serious problems (it also assumed your parents paid for college if you have money, because rich parents have never hated a gay kid and tossed him/her out on the street) 2) required you to own a company generating 500k in revenue or more or 3) was a program that literally already exists. Looking at her college plan, it's pretty clear it was cooked up based on the only type of college grads she'd ever interact with. Unpaid interns whos parents are footing the bill, lovely 'wonk' think tanks, and silicon valley dudes. You can't name ONE economic issue that she could outline in a single sentence and while people think that's 'smart' it's really not because that's a lot harder to sell. People know that exists elsewhere and they can wrap their minds around it. She's a salesman and she created a pitch that takes half an hour to muddle through, and once you're done there's nothing to get excited about even if you were one of the few who listened until the end. lovely democrats LOVE means testing because in their minds people will lose their poo poo if a millionaire gets something, but the reality is the reverse. People love programs that just work and they can understand. Dudes who lose their poo poo at millionaires don't do it because they collect SSR, they do it because they get away with financial crimes. You get old, you then get a check every month based on what you paid. People get that, and they can understand it. blamegame posted: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 She literally thought she won the campaign already and was terrified of having any position that she'd actually have to be accountable to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Trump seems like he's changing the game just fine he changed the game from monopoly to calvinball it's not exactly a step forward
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Plucky Brit posted:I may be wrong, but my understanding was that Obama was planning to keep the Guantanamo prisoners indefinitely without trial; he was just going to move them to the mainland. If that is the case, Obama was never going to claim the moral high ground. But he could have looked as though he was; which i think was more important to him. truly the zoux of presidents
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Trump isn't changing the game in the way Lastgirl meant. You could argue that he changed the political-campaign game but so far his presidency looks like more of the same
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
redneck nazgul posted:he changed the game from monopoly to calvinball It's huge (yuge, if you will) for Trump and Republicans. It could have been huge for a Dem candidate and the Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I.. don't see anything wrong there? Is this more circular firing squad economic or social justice pick one bullshit? There's tons of socialist writings on the subject, but basically she's just evading. It gets a lot easier to sell progressive views on race and gender once people are fat and happy. The reverse is not true, if you focus on just race, gender, sexuality, etc without any kind of hard economic stance, people will tell you to fix the 'real poo poo' first. The quote I keep hearing in Ohio is "They cared more that a person can go to a different bathroom than whether I am employed or not."
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Freddie has a good post up about this (broader argument) today. This is really good. I especially liked this quote: quote:If you believe that some people deserve their hardships, you’re my enemy, and it doesn’t matter what color tie you wear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:It's huge (yuge, if you will) for Trump and Republicans. It could have been huge for a Dem candidate and the Democrats. no, because the republicans would still control the house and state legislatures and the democrats would still be spineless incrementalists monopoly is apt because once someone starts winning, they continue to win and the rest of the game is just a slow painful slog towards the inevitable end in the current hypermajority game of calvinball that the republicans have, they can just go ahead and rewrite all of the rules to 'trump and the republicans win, everyone else can suck it'
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Trump isn't changing the game in the way Lastgirl meant. You could argue that he changed the political-campaign game but so far his presidency looks like more of the same Exactly, the sun still rises. A wild bear shits in the wood. Death is still certain. Trump is just a mortal with lots of (other people's) money and made American politics painfully aware of its consumerist/capitalist lifestyle and its extremes. He is just a walking billboard, literally and sold himself better than any career politician has in the last 2 decades. Soon enough, politicians will be wearing their sponsors on their suit like  The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, the same song and dance since man met himself at the dawn of time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
redneck nazgul posted:no, because the republicans would still control the house and state legislatures and the democrats would still be spineless incrementalists The House is lost until gerrymandering is eliminated forever. But they could have flipped seats if only they had a candidate people were excited about, with a populist bent. Oh well, no one really fit that bill this time around. But realtalk, no point to "EVERYTHING IS hosed" chat when Dems can and do win elections
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Speaking as someone who has a proven track record of hating Amanda Marcotte, does anyone take her seriously? The only context I've ever seen her quoted was by people talking about how dumb and bad she is. Does the have any actual influence? I mean, as someone who lived the election in a Clinton heavy town, yes, she was all over facebook feeds and people would constantly talk about seeing her on TV.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Actually I recant that statement. Trump didn't sell himself, he sold the american people better. Art of the Deal baby~ You want your jobs, I will bring them back from Gyner or whatever that country I outsourced my overpriced trump brand poo poo that I get for a dime in bulk over there or whatever u got it friend 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Since this thread has largely become about arguing and sharing arguments now that the initial wave of criticisms has passed, would people like to see a dedicated "Getting Involved and Staring Involved" thread?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Selling police reform isn't even hard. You just dont mention race and suddenly all the patriots are on board to reduce the strong arm of the tyrannical government.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Since this thread has largely become about arguing and sharing arguments now that the initial wave of criticisms has passed, would people like to see a dedicated "Getting Involved and Staring Involved" thread? There's an activism thread, but I think that's more for particular causes rather than helping the Democrats unfuck themselves. Go for it. At worst, nobody posts in it or it gets gassed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:you just have to be funny about it, if you're funny you can get away with a lot of things It turns out Hillary's cameo on "Broad City" that one time actually wasn't funny enough. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Since this thread has largely become about arguing and sharing arguments now that the initial wave of criticisms has passed, would people like to see a dedicated "Getting Involved and Staring Involved" thread? We have a thread for that actually. Effective Leftism: Practical Organisation and Involvement Thread
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It turns out Hillary's cameo on "Broad City" that one time actually wasn't funny enough. Bernie's SNL cameo wasn't funny either the Larry David skits about him were though e: people were unironically saying that "Hillary Clinton is not charismatic" was a sexist dogwhistle during the election though, that's how strong the anti-criticism shield was
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Bernie's SNL cameo wasn't funny either in some cases it was
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Bernie's SNL cameo wasn't funny either her Between Two Ferns video was funny. too bad half the people that watched it started cheering Zach Galifinakis for "taking it to that bitch" because their brains can't figure out dead pan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
quote:e: people were unironically saying that "Hillary Clinton is not charismatic" was a sexist dogwhistle during the election though, that's how strong the anti-criticism shield was I'm pretty sure HillaryIs44 people (both literally and those in spirit) believed that Obama only won because he wore race as a shield and accused everyone of racism as a point of deflection, so they tried to own that tactic this time around not realizing that Obama never did anything of the sort, it's just lovely and racist to infer that MLK had less to do with civil rights than a white guy and that Obama will be assassinated. mugrim has issued a correction as of 17:59 on Nov 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Al! posted:in some cases it was this, to be fair some of it was a jab at the fact that she refused to bake cookies~
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:this, to be fair some of it was a jab at the fact that she refused to bake cookies~ criticisms that werent legit still arent legit even tho she lost an election. are we going to be revisiting #HillarysHealth too
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
heres a good article about how silicon valleys globalization and technology push is loving a lot of people http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/silicon-valley-has-an-empathy-vacuum Otto, a Bay Area startup that was recently acquired by Uber, wants to automate trucking—and recently wrapped up a hundred-and-twenty-mile driverless delivery of fifty thousand cans of beer between Fort Collins and Colorado Springs. From a technological standpoint it was a jaw-dropping achievement, accompanied by predictions of improved highway safety. From the point of view of a truck driver with a mortgage and a kid in college, it was a devastating “oh, poo poo” moment. That one technical breakthrough puts nearly two million long-haul trucking jobs at risk. Truck driving is one of the few decent-paying jobs that doesn’t require a college diploma. Eliminating the need for truck drivers doesn’t just affect those millions of drivers; it has a ripple effect on ancillary services like gas stations, motels, and retail outlets; an entire economic ecosystem could break down. Whether self-driving cars and trucks, drones, privatization of civic services like transportation, or dynamic pricing, all these developments embrace automation and efficiency, and abhor friction and waste. As Erik Brynjolfsson, a professor at the M.I.T. Sloan School of Management told MIT Technology Review, “Productivity is at record levels, innovation has never been faster, and yet at the same time, we have a falling median income and we have fewer jobs. People are falling behind because technology is advancing so fast and our skills and organizations aren’t keeping up.” It is, he said, “the great paradox of our era.”
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:this, to be fair some of it was a jab at the fact that she refused to bake cookies~ she did win a contest with her cookies and the recipe isn't bad, though I still maintain Barbara Bush unnecessarily handicapped herself by going with lemon bars
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
comingafteryouall posted:her Between Two Ferns video was funny. too bad half the people that watched it started cheering Zach Galifinakis for "taking it to that bitch" because their brains can't figure out dead pan. I mean i guess it depends on how much credit you give someone for being the straight (wo)man Al! posted:are we going to be revisiting #HillarysHealth too I don't know, if we are listing reasons she lost, sure. Get tossed into a van and wait several hours for the "official" final answer, that makes people trust ya! LGD posted:she did win a contest with her cookies and the recipe isn't bad, though I still maintain Barbara Bush unnecessarily handicapped herself by going with lemon bars Uhhhh lemon bars are amazing
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
LGD posted:she did win a contest with her cookies and the recipe isn't bad, though I still maintain Barbara Bush unnecessarily handicapped herself by going with lemon bars anyone who doesnt prefer lemon bars is a monster in my eyes
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
its a cookie contest
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
lemon bars are awesome, but they're just not a universal crowd pleaser like a chocolate chip cookie
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Last time I had lemon bars, they were way too tart. Thats my lemon bar story, thanks for reading
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Al! posted:criticisms that werent legit still arent legit even tho she lost an election. pretty much. Not literally every single thing against her was sexist, but if we're gonna pretend sexism wasn't a factor at all in some 'criticisms' of her that's just silly too. There were legit criticisms and dumb ones, just like for every candidate, and just like every candidate that happens to be a non straight white dude some of those dumb ones came from a place of bigotry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:its a cookie contest Lemon cars are cookies, I will fight you on this
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
LGD posted:lemon bars are awesome, but they're just not a universal crowd pleaser like a chocolate chip cookie something something hillary clinton
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Al! posted:something something hillary clinton lol nothing chocolate in Clinton's world
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Lemon cars are cookies, I will fight you on this cars? man you so wack you can't even type the name "bars" more like lemon cucks you can take your lemon 'cars' to the nearest lemon party and enjoy
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2016 18:09
|
|