|
Concerned Citizen posted:from an election perspective - and one thing that brought me unending agony from hfa - i think the biggest messaging issue is that democrats do not tend to talk about the big issues. republicans are easy to figure out - every single position links back to the fundamental ideology of small government and freedom. everything drills back to "government is the reason you haven't succeeded. republicans will bring our economy back." should we tax more? no, less government. should we regulate wall street? no, less government. democrats, by contrast, tend to talk about individual issues as if they existed in a vacuum - raise the minimum wage, protect the environment. in effect, republicans routinely make big arguments and democrats talk about small arguments. and while the public often agrees with democrats on those small arguments, the gop wins the war. the problem is that everything often doesn't have the same answer, but Republicans love to frame it as "if you just do the things we want everything will be better" even though that has never ever happened every singe time they've taken power.
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
a favorite tactic is to point at some nonsense regulation, like pillows or whatever, then use that to justify removing regulations preventing businesses from loving people over
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Or to add more regulation on abortion, voring and minority rights while keeping with a straight face that you totally just care about freedom. That's just an effect of a captive media who refuse to call out their blatant hypocrisy for fear of 'bias', not crafting some big agreeable message. It's a stock justification that has no relationship to anything they do. The only lesson one can take from the GOP is "just lie to the dumb rubes" is a winning strategy with no consequences, and the truth is a pure political liability.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:the problem is that everything often doesn't have the same answer, but Republicans love to frame it as "if you just do the things we want everything will be better" even though that has never ever happened every singe time they've taken power. gonna be a pedant and point out that this has only really been true since the 1980s
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:from an election perspective - and one thing that brought me unending agony from hfa - i think the biggest messaging issue is that democrats do not tend to talk about the big issues. republicans are easy to figure out - every single position links back to the fundamental ideology of small government and freedom. everything drills back to "government is the reason you haven't succeeded. republicans will bring our economy back." should we tax more? no, less government. should we regulate wall street? no, less government. democrats, by contrast, tend to talk about individual issues as if they existed in a vacuum - raise the minimum wage, protect the environment. in effect, republicans routinely make big arguments and democrats talk about small arguments. and while the public often agrees with democrats on those small arguments, the gop wins the war. "You see, in our two-party system, the Democrats are the party of no ideas and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas." - Lewis Black
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:gonna be a pedant and point out that this has only really been true since the 1980s I dunno, it smacks heavily of Nixons 68 message.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:gonna be a pedant and point out that this has only really been true since the 1980s your pedant point is noted and accepted
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Rastor posted:"You see, in our two-party system, the Democrats are the party of no ideas and the Republicans are the party of bad ideas." - Lewis Black i don't even agree that democrats are the parties of no ideas. they have plenty of ideas, but they aren't together into a coherent vision.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
I actually like fulchrums plan of passing legislation to make insurance unsustainable and use that as an excuse to backdoor single payer. I am not sure how single payer is supposed to be an alternative to single payer, or why he thinks single payer can succeed where single payer failed, especially since its literally the most common suggestion for single player implementation (expanded medicare) but whatever. i will take it
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Nietzschean posted:I don't understand the health care debate. We give free health care, with an independent set of government doctors and facilities, both for military and (some) veterans. Moral argument aside (i.e., those groups deserve it more or whatever), what prevents the same being done for civilians? We have the money. It's really jarring to go from being encouraged to see medical over the least little thing in the name of preventive care to seeing fellow civilians afraid to go to the doctor when they have clear injuries or illnesses. What the actual gently caress is this, and why do we allow it? The civilian way of life ought to be as good as or better than the service members who defend them, or else what are we defending? FYI, I heard many vets who voted for Trump say this online and basically say they're hoping he does a Trumpcare based on the military. You can also read interviews in "The Gilded Rage" where other vets say that. Fulchrum posted:Ah yes, remember those massive demonstrations in 2009 and 2010 where angry crowds held signs saying "get the government into my healthcare" and "Obama is a small government capitalist"? I know you're talking about the tea party, but I 100% remember those, as well as the tens of thousands of volunteers and organizers I worked with over medicaid expansion. Clinton fans are hilarious, the white working class doesn't matter and Khaleesi will still win in a landslide, but then you try to do something real and magically a few demonstrations overblown by the media along with a hilariously transparent astroturf campaign will bring everything down. I know TONS of republicans that love single payer, and I know tons of democrats who loving hate the PPACA. Remember folks, when the largest protest in history went down, democrats had to still vote for Iraq due to political realities. But when some rich dudes have to pay racists less than a magnitude that size to do something, suddenly protest participation matters. It's almost like awful neoliberals try to appear to want to make progress but any time they get close they need to find a reason to start sucking up to their corporate donors. Fulchrum posted:The only lesson one can take from the GOP is "just lie to the dumb rubes" is a winning strategy with no consequences, and the truth is a pure political liability. This is only true if you assume Trump will not accomplish a single thing he promised. I highly doubt that's true. It might be compromised versions, but I bet at least some of it will happen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
mugrim posted:
Now lemme guess, both times are totally all the mean ole' establishments fault. mugrim posted:
Fulchrum has issued a correction as of 02:49 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
mugrim posted:Clinton fans are hilarious, the white working class doesn't matter and Khaleesi will still win in a landslide, but then you try to do something real and magically a few demonstrations overblown by the media along with a hilariously transparent astroturf campaign will bring everything down. I know TONS of republicans that love single payer, and I know tons of democrats who loving hate the PPACA.  while the amendment was never going to win given that progressives were split on it, 21% doesn't give me confidence the people are actually clamoring for single payer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:When the largest protests in history went down, the effect was that the Republicans held both houses of Congress in a midterm while their guy had the white house, for the first time since 1926, and in fact increased their control in both during a defensive midterm for the first time, EVER, in the history of the Republican party. When something less than a magnitude (wtf?) the size of those protests happened, Dems lost hugely and ceded control of the house and most governorships. You know WHY the democrats lost their seats in 2004 was right? Almost every dem who lost that election voted FOR OIF. quote:Name one thing he promised that's not completely goddamn impossible, antithetical to everything Republicans actually want, or inevitably just going to make things a whole lot worse. Well for starters the TPP is already looking like it's dying. That alone would qualify. He will probably deport millions of Americans (and now that it's not Obama, people will care). He will probably get some bullshit form of a wall up, though it won't be complete, it'll probably be exactly what HRC was advocating for when she refused to say wall and kept saying she wanted a 'barrier'. He'll probably get the PPACA amended and fast. Concerned Citizen posted:
Amendment 64 barely won, yet Colorado overall seems super happy about it and it's wildly popular. I don't think lovely state amendments are good testing grounds. Obama's loudest claim in 2008 was ending Iraq, followed by a public option. While it's not single payer, there was a small window to strike. I'm not saying single payer was coming now by any stretch, but you don't poo poo on it as an impossibility, especially if a republican legislature amends the PPACA because if rates raise high enough, telling people you'll allow any american a medicare or medicaid buy in taxed based on income as an option is an easy sell, and that's just a step away. But hey, here's the joke answer. "You know what single payer had a higher approval rate than? Hillary Clinton". btw, Gallop puts a majority of Americans as fans of a public health system with only a third against it. I'm willing to trust that poll more than a single amendment that had issues in a single state.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
Good news everybody! Democrats will learn nothing from 2016. https://twitter.com/jbendery/status/803640907245514752 2016 Dem autopsy synopsis: gently caress 'em. We didn't want their votes anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:
i 2 base my political beliefs on ballot question results
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Good news everybody! Democrats will learn nothing from 2016. Given that Pelosi is one of those Dems that depends on fundraisers on the coast for her political life, this is probably more a reaction to that swipe at her voters than anything else. Or, y'know, we're hosed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:Given that Pelosi is one of those Dems that depends on fundraisers on the coast for her political life, this is probably more a reaction to that swipe at her voters than anything else. It's probably all of the above. Fun option: Trump does so bad that by 2020 he performs so poorly that anyone would win. The dems take this as a sign that their hyper corporatist candidate of choice was the real answer, and that Clinton wasn't favorable enough to corporations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:Given that Pelosi is one of those Dems that depends on fundraisers on the coast for her political life, this is probably more a reaction to that swipe at her voters than anything else. Nancy Pelosi has the safest seat of safe seats...has she ever had a credible primary challenge? She certainly has never had one from a republican. She gives money she raises to democrats in tougher elections, god knows she doesn't need it. I think she's just tone deaf. The best thing you can do is email your democratic congressman, if you have one, and bitch them out to vote for Tim Ryan tomorow. Of course it's a secret vote so you're still hosed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
mugrim posted:You know WHY the democrats lost their seats in 2004 was right? Almost every dem who lost that election voted FOR OIF. A midterm happens between two presidential elections. There was a presidential election in 2004, so it's not a midterm. Now in 2002, here is in an interesting bit of trivia for you. Do you know that only two Republicans lost their house seat in 2002 due to actually being beaten while incumbent? And guess who one of them was. Connie Morella, only Republican to oppose the authorisation of force. And even your loving example of 2004 flat out fails. The only Democrat in the senate who lost was Tom Daschle, who lost it because he was attacked for criticism of the Iraq war!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:Nancy Pelosi has the safest seat of safe seats...has she ever had a credible primary challenge? She certainly has never had one from a republican. She gives money she raises to democrats in tougher elections, god knows she doesn't need it. My point is that Pelosi is probably tone deaf but still what Ryan said was an obvious swipe at the rich urban Dem voters that make her safe seat so drat safe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
The gently caress is a fish fry?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The gently caress is a fish fry?  Trumps face reminds me of fried fish
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Okay, it seems I'm gonna have to start with the basics with you. The point I made wasn't about the war vote, it was about the protest, which wasn't in 2002, but 2003. Somehow the Dems backed a dude who voted for the war in the general and lost. You're right about the 2004 senate losses, a gently caress ton of them dropped out to run for president. Fulchrum posted:The gently caress is a fish fry? Lot of people, often around a community center like a VFW, union hall, or church fry fish (usually catfish) and eat it communally. It's a super popular fundraiser in parts of the south and mid-west. mugrim has issued a correction as of 04:19 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:16
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The gently caress is a fish fry? get a load of this guy over here
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
mugrim posted:The point I made wasn't about the war vote, it was about the protest, which wasn't in 2002, but 2003. The protests started in 2002. And even if you say 2002 doesn't count and only 2004 is valid, the only Democrat senator to lose was tarred by his opponent for his criticism of the war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
just lol if you don't attend your town's annual fish fry / chicken bake / beef sous vide event
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The gently caress is a fish fry? A battered and fried fish. Depending on where you are, it could be haddock or cod or even catfish. Catfish is big down south, I've heard. They're huge in the northeast, the midwest, and the south, and come from the christian tradition of eating fish on fridays. It's basically just Fish and Chips, but there's events around them all over those states, almost every fire hall or church has one of them sometime during the year. Grondoth has issued a correction as of 04:22 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The gently caress is a fish fry? Coastal elite spotted
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The protests started in 2002. Yes, everyone else in a contentious area straight up dropped out of the race either to retire or run for president. I'll admit it's a bad example, but again, somehow this massive display wasn't enough to change anything. A few teabaggers pull out signs and you assume government paid healthcare is an impossibility. Which is it? The answer of "THE OUTCOMES ARE DIFFERENT!" is dumb, because then there's no point in even referencing the protests. Nothing is funnier than the fact you don't think healthcare premiums will be a critical mass when in reality, for tons of people, they're there. Making 30k a year to support a family and losing 600 bucks a check to healthcare is totally normal. mugrim has issued a correction as of 04:26 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Grondoth posted:A battered and fried fish. Depending on where you are, it could be haddock or cod or even catfish. They're huge in the northeast, the midwest, and the south, and come from the christian tradition of eating fish on fridays. It's basically just Fish and Chips, but there's events around them all over those states, almost every fire hall or church has one of them sometime during the year. What, like a potluck? Or is there a central organisation providing a free fried fish dinner for the community? Like, every time I have been to a church dinner, it's always been potluck, so I always thought that was what everyone used for the generalised term. Never heard off it being just Fish before. And wasn't fish on fridays just a Catholic thing? How much traction would that have down south?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The gently caress is a fish fry? It's a midwestern community thing where they fry up a lot of fish and chips and everyone eats together. The fact you, a Hillaryman, don't even have a passing acquaintance with a major cultural thing in the Midwest/Rust Belt really says a lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:What, like a potluck? Or is there a central organisation providing a free fried fish dinner for the community? Jesus Christ, this is why the Democrats are loving awful. Yes, lots of Christians eat fish on Fridays other than Catholics. This is literally THE fundraising event for like a fourth/fifth of the countries local races as well as a way to get ideas out. Because of the importance of the loving rustbelt, this is a super important campaign tool used very successfully by candidates for presidential races since the rustbelt's voting habits tend to have huge impacts. Plus it's loving delicious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
mugrim posted:Yes, everyone else in a contentious area straight up dropped out of the race either to retire or run for president. The size of the protest doesn't loving matter, it's how well that groups displays the feelings of the American public, which we can only get by looking at the election results. Republicans didn't face any backlash or consequences for Iraq until 2006. Meanwhile, after trying healthcare reforms, democrats received a swift and decisive rebuking from the electorate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:The size of the protest doesn't loving matter, it's how well that groups displays the feelings of the American public, which we can only get by looking at the election results. Republicans didn't face any backlash or consequences for Iraq until 2006. Meanwhile, after trying healthcare reforms, democrats received a swift and decisive rebuking from the electorate. Not from the electorate, that's why it was swift. 2010 was straight up astroturf campaigning. Like, do you seriously think grassroots political feelings raised independently that fast without hundreds of millions in coordination? Tea party groups funded with millions of dollars of Koch money sprang up overnight. I hate to break it to you, but they'll fight just as hard if you make a bill regulating healthcare with a mandate or go for full on government funded healthcare. It's not like they would have fought harder. Here is a campaigner who's not uniquely terrible and unfit to run a campaign explaining it's importance. But hey, I hope those three times she saw Hamilton during the election was worth ignoring Michigan and Wisconsin and those gross proles. mugrim has issued a correction as of 04:37 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:What, like a potluck? Or is there a central organisation providing a free fried fish dinner for the community? There's probably very complicated culinary history, but they're big across the south and the northeast and the midwest. It isn't always free, often times it isn't free, you pay to get in or something cause they hire someone to provide it cause frying up fish isn't easy. I've made my own before and while it was super good, it was super messy. I donno where you're from, so I don't wanna be too mean about this but dude how do you not know anything about these? Fish Fries are in the same category of "things politicians go to" as fairs and big state college graduation ceremonies. You may not have a specific image in your mind when you think of the food 'Fish Fry'(like I do, there's a gas station near me that's got secretly the best Fish Fry you can get for the money), but surely you must've heard someone mention it as an event before this! Grondoth has issued a correction as of 04:39 on Nov 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
But for real though, what's a county fair? What is a Four H? Why are there four of them? Is that like a NASCAR thing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
mugrim posted:Not from the electorate, that's why it was swift. 2010 was straight up astroturf campaigning. What the hell does it matter if it's astroturfed or not? This is a reproducible reaction that can and will emerge any time any form of government healthcare improvement is floated, so all it shows is there will not be a tipping point or a breakthrough moment where Americans realise "actually, single payer is great, we need to support it". The original point was that if the big money elites try to oppose health care reform, and a political party tries to cozy up and help them, the people will totally rise up and punish them. The Republicans are so far up the Koch brothers rear end they need them to fart to breathe, did everything they could to kill healthcare reform, and the American people gave them all three branches of government for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:What the hell does it matter if it's astroturfed or not? This is a reproducible reaction that can and will emerge any time any form of government healthcare improvement is floated, so all it shows is there will not be a tipping point or a breakthrough moment where Americans realise "actually, single payer is great, we need to support it". Well for one thing, it polls over half right now, and did even better right after the election. The dems went weak on it and took the public option off the table. It was a beautiful moment to do well with it and they hosed it up. A 100% chance of enacting the PPACA wasn't worth not taking the lesser chance to get actual UHC. quote:The original point was that if the big money elites try to oppose health care reform, and a political party tries to cozy up and help them, the people will totally rise up and punish them. The Republicans are so far up the Koch brothers rear end they need them to fart to breathe, did everything they could to kill healthcare reform, and the American people gave them all three branches of government for it. They oppose all sorts of stuff, that doesn't mean you don't try and do anything. So make them blow their money, get nasty, and get people on the record voting against it. Premiums for families are HILARIOUSLY expensive right now for most of the nation and there's zero indication it won't keep rising at crazy rates. Arizona just had their low end Obamacare plan premiums jump 116%. THIS YEAR. While that is extreme, 20% increases this year alone is pretty common (with wages going up just a few percent), and there's zero indication any of this is slowing down. Sorry, but people in states without medicaid expansion will begin to be unable to even afford a plan, and people in states with it won't be that much long after. If you had gone to any fish fries though, you might have actually heard about how loving awful healthcare costs are and how people making 20 and 30k are getting reamed over the coals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
i am really, really, really lucky that i am healthy bc lol rip my health insurance
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 05:03
|
|
