|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
I'm excited for Keith Ellison to try the revolutionary campaign strategy of running ads in states you need to get votes from
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:I'm excited for Keith Ellison to try the revolutionary campaign strategy of running ads in states you need to get votes from Also campaign on something other than "Hey i'm not that guy!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton is quite simply a worse candidate than Walter Mondale.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Chelb posted:There is a categorical difference between ¿porque no los dos?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:it's to keep him out of the way in a do-nothing job if he was backing some centrist type you would be screaming bloody murder, spare me
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I can't wait for people to lift Keith Ellison up as the next great hope for socialism and then be let down. i hope that doesn't happen and I'm saddened by your eagerness to see that outcome
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Hell, let's try some other hypotheticals. Would a Lena Dunham-less Clinton have won the presidency?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
plus once in power i think it's better to try doing your best and overstepping your bounds to help instead of doing only what you think is pragmatically feasible. losses in 2010, 2014 and 2016 are all partially a result of democrats not pressing hard enough at the crucial point in time post crash in 2009 and trying to work within the pretty-broken system they had to work with (with things like the debt ceiling and government shutdown, or the ACA being a handout to insurance providers). You want the opponent to have to play catch-up by taking advantage of a crucial point, not worry about appearing bipartisan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:i hope that doesn't happen and I'm saddened by your eagerness to see that outcome I suspect your hope is not "baby leftists learn the difference between leftism and liberalism" and more "keith ellison turns out to be huey p. newton's reincarnation", which would be great, but I'm putting my money on the former. Rodatose posted:plus once in power i think it's better to try doing your best and overstepping your bounds to help instead of doing only what you think is pragmatically feasible. On the other hand, to get into power you generally have to be invested enough in the current system not to want to blow it up or even risk blowing it up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
to be entirely fair i don't think anybody knows exactly what he wants to do when he becomes chair but it's a reasonable bet that he will not and will not want the dem party to entirely ignore the midwest, especially as he is from there and appointing him would be a cool statement on behalf of the party that they will not be champing at the bit to pivot towards dogwhistles and more conservative rhetoric in an attempt to get more white midwestern votes
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Did Obama win because of his policy promises, or because he was a challenger and messaged using "Hope and Change"? by 2016, hope and change messaging's effectiveness had definitely worn off with democrats being not very capable of delivering it. In order for an incumbent party's messaging to be effective, it has to build off something. In 2012 obama at least had "we saved GM" paired up against romney's record of being a vulture capitalist, while clinton didn't have very effective positive, regionally targeted messaging to pair up against trump being a conman who will quickly betray their economic promises
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Obama won because IRAQ WAR. Clinton didn't have IRAQ WAR but fortunately whoever tuns in 2024 will have CHINA WAR and NUCLEAR WASTELAND KOREA to campaign on instead, thanks to Trump's excellent foreign policy
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
it would be good if, in 2020, the dems could do an 80s jesse jackson campaign https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HouwoMCQXXs
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:by 2016, hope and change messaging's effectiveness had definitely worn off with democrats being not very capable of delivering it. In order for an incumbent party's messaging to be effective, it has to build off something. In 2012 obama at least had "we saved GM" paired up against romney's record of being a vulture capitalist, while clinton didn't have very effective positive, regionally targeted messaging to pair up against trump being a conman who will quickly betray their economic promises Well I mean, hope and change isn't something you can as effectively campaign on as the ruling party, and simultaneously, pointing to policy successes as someone from the same party but not directly responsible for them seems questionable in terms of being convincing. Rodatose posted:denald tromp will be president. That's why I said "generally". There are always exceptions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
I hope Brick Man runs in 2020
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
merry exmarx posted:it would be good if, in 2020, the dems could do an 80s jesse jackson campaign i see someone's been reading slate
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
Clinton couldn't "Kerry" her party to victory
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:i see someone's been reading slate rude, i have nnot
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Well I mean, hope and change isn't something you can as effectively campaign on as the ruling party, and simultaneously, pointing to policy successes as someone from the same party but not directly responsible for them seems questionable in terms of being convincing. Otherwise, people may be unwilling to believe you if you try to change your proposed policies to be more progressive when campaigning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:it could be convincing if the candidate has a personal political record of doing things similar to the successes they're pointing to. That's the thing, though. Hillary could't have taken credit for things that the president can do, since she was senator and secretary of state. She could have been the best possible candidate in the world for our politics and still not have been able to use that approach. I don't actually think most people are like internet leftists where they insist that people's politics are set in stone, though, because a) that seems a couple levels beyond where most people think about politics and b) most people don't actually have the reasons for being invested in that notion that leftists do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:i see someone's been reading slate i like jamelle bouie, even though starting a slapfight with the chapo/jacobin crowd was dumb
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
The democrats should never nominate someone who voted for the loving iraq war again
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Hell, let's try some other hypotheticals. Would a Lena Dunham-less Clinton have won the presidency? semi-related but i hope ezra klein is gibbeted
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
maybe the Democrats shouldnt have thrown away their own campaign machine eight years ago just because the best Dem campaigner in half a century beat a wet blanket whose predecessor's approval ratings were in the twenties that probably would have made more difference than holding more rallies or whatever
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnK9tEdNjX8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1ZKV5h87RE
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
sudo rm -rf posted:turns out all anime is bad
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
I will lead the democrats to a decisive bloody victory
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:That's the thing, though. Hillary could't have taken credit for things that the president can do, since she was senator and secretary of state. She could have been the best possible candidate in the world for our politics and still not have been able to use that approach. Right, Hillary couldn't have done that because their record as secretary of state was stuff that mostly goes over people's heads, while their senate record (the thing where they'd be able to more independently prove their commitment to a certain type of policy and connect it to other successful politicians/policies) involved certain things like whipping for the Iraq War and proposing a flag burning bill. It doesn't help that Clinton was the opponent of Obama in a pretty bitterly contested primary, with the newcomer being provided as a contrast against Clinton on war and economic issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
First things first we must increase the autonomy of grassroots activists by reorganising into a cell structure to confound conventional command and control disruption counter-guerilla tactics
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:Right, Hillary couldn't have done that because their record as secretary of state was stuff that mostly goes over people's heads, while their senate record (the thing where they'd be able to more independently prove their commitment to a certain type of policy and connect it to other successful politicians/policies) involved certain things like whipping for the Iraq War and proposing a flag burning bill. I don't think being in favor of banning flag burning is exactly a killer thing for the areas where she lost. I mean, it's something younger people and people who view themselves as left-wing hate, but those are groups that have very limited or very high turnout for more or less institutional factors. But being a legislator does generally mean a policy record that's pretty lovely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
I think if, after 2008, clinton wanted a shot to be seen as progressive in 2016, they would have had to do things differently. Maybe run for governor of some state and form a progressive record there. Being secretary of state didn't help their chances; maybe they hoped that 2016 would be an election like 2004 where the discourse was largely centered around foreign policy? w/e
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Then comes the rock the vote initative whereby we systematically attack polling places and encourage a total boycott off all elections to frustrate the rigged electoral system constructed by the racist settler colonial establishment to sweeten their exploitative system and provoke a reactionary totalitarian response to polarise the citizenry in our favour
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Keith Ellison is a shill and the desperate attempt by the democratic establishment to save itself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
when will the anime about the primary come out what will it be called
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Keith Ellison is a shill and the desperate attempt by the democratic establishment to save itself. i knew he'd be a great choice
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
i guess what i'm saying is that clinton failed to convincingly reinvent themselves after being repudiated in 2008. it's not just voting for the iraq war, it's whipping for it that's troublesome. it's hard to take seriously someone's alleged commitment to justice domestically and abroad when their image and record is interwoven with the bush era and its violations of justice in the name of patriotism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:59 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:29
|
|