|
Fiction posted:I'm saying the TPP was bad and there's plenty of critical reading you can do about it, and that he went along with it because Obama was doing it is a bad sign considering where Obama took the party under his leadership. I have done a whole lot of reading about the TPP and a lot of the "criticism" is overheated nonsense, but again how does support for the TPP as Labor Sec at all translate to his role as essentially, fundraiser in chief, for the democratic national committee? And again for full-disclosure: I signed Bernie's petition for Ellison and support him for chair.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:42 |
|
|
check post history and primary past
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I have done a whole lot of reading about the TPP and a lot of the "criticism" is overheated nonsense, but again how does support for the TPP as Labor Sec at all translate to his role as essentially, fundraiser in chief, for the democratic national committee? It shows where his priorities lie, as does that incident above with him granting waivers to Credit Suisse because they were friendly with the donor base.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
The loving funny thing is the people defending Perez are saying "he's so good with unions!" as a key talking point Guess what! Unions are loving dead! They haven't won a single legal or political battle in the last 20 years. If you chain your horse to a loving political group that is on the floor bleeding our, dead in public opinion and eternally shrinking in numbers, you are going to loving lose. This is one of the reasons dems keep loving losing! You have to come up with a alternate labour movement but it's not going to be unions because they are loving dead and Perez being in with them is not going to particularly help the party in any way or form.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Ya'll are glossing over a number of events that have frustrated the left, specifically the character assassination campaign against Ellison as an anti-semite, scattered events like Perez running away from a far left journalist asking a reasonable question about BDS, his support for TPP, his endorsement of Clinton, and the general push by the establishment wing in favor of Perez. These aren't nitty gritty details, these are anecdotes that made the press. This is a comparatively invisible, poorly covered process, so thats where people are making their judgments. Additionally, there's a lot of bad faith with this performative bewilderment as to why left wingers care about DNC chair so much. DWS specifically was a huge sore spot during the primary, and resigned over it mid-process! Donna Brazile leaked a question to the Clinton Campaign, which certainly didn't single handedly shift the primary, but is still an enormous breach of ethics and impartiality, yet she's still kicking around as interim chair. To a lot of Sanders voters, DNC leadership looks like a poo poo show, quite justifiably. The idea that the Sanders left wants a guy they can trust in there to ensure that their candidates don't get treated the same way is perfectly reasonable and understandable. Yeah the criteria for that trust isn't based on a sober analysis of the issue to issue support, or counting endorsements, or a perfect understanding of democratic party arcana. They want someone they trust, endorsed by someone they trust. Duh? By the real, rational, human, political standard that left wing Democrats are applying, yes Ellison is infinitely better than Perez. They aren't lobbying for the perfect record, they're lobbying for an administrator they can personally trust. It's super simple and it's really strange to me how many Democrats indifferent to or supportive of Perez don't even understand why the left cares about Ellison so much. Periodiko fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:The loving funny thing is the people defending Perez are saying "he's so good with unions!" as a key talking point Uh, I see you don't know anything about the state of Nevada, where unions are not only dead but they helped hold Reid's senate seat and get a house seat. But sure, continue to talk about this like you know what you're talking about. Fiction posted:It shows where his priorities lie, as does that incident above with him granting waivers to Credit Suisse because they were friendly with the donor base. His priorities of doing his job as secretary of labor, huh. Periodiko posted:his endorsement of Clinton, Summarized your post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:
Yeah, and I'm sure there'll be a lot of "just doing his job" to help the donors if he's made chair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Do you believe that Ellison represents a major shift in strategy for the DNC? What led you to this belief? I think Ellison would not actively work to delegitimize Bernie Sanders and his wing of the party, unlike the previous chair of the Democratic Party. Perez is supported by the folks who deny DWS was bad and freaked out when he even suggested it might have. It is a major problem. Obviously the issues are much bigger than one person, they are systemic, but I think Ellison will be more open to shifting the party more to the left. Bernie's support is a key.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Yeah, and I'm sure there'll be a lot of "just doing his job" to help the donors if he's made chair. What do you think the job of the DNC chair is exactly? Do you think it has some special role other than, raising money? NNick posted:Perez is supported by the folks who deny DWS was bad and freaked out when he even suggested it might have. Dude, loving everyone in the goddamn party hated DWS. Obama and Podesta tried to get rid of her twice and she threatened to go scorched earth on them and say Obama was anti-woman and antisemitic. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:What do you think the job of the DNC chair is exactly? Do you think it has some special role other than, raising money? His job being the fundraiser means he has a lot of sway on the whole process that can be leveraged to help a certain set of candidates. Don't play dumb on this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Unions won a major SCOTUS case last year in Friedrichs v. California Teachers rear end'n, a case notable in that Scalia died right after it was argued
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Uh, I see you don't know anything about the state of Nevada, where unions are not only dead but they helped hold Reid's senate seat and get a house seat. But sure, continue to talk about this like you know what you're talking about. Exactly how relevant is Nevada? You don't win a election with Nevada. Nevada is not a loving key state. Unions are being demolished in every single rust belt state. The sooner you recognize how loving lost of a cause they are the sooner we can find a way to overcome it. But you are living proof of being a ostrich stuck with their head in the sand. If Perez wins the DNC chair the Bernie left will not trust the Dems and probably not turn out in 2020. Which means 8 years of Trump. You like the rest of the Dem leadership don't care They're rich. They're mostly white. They have their future careers and retirement assured. They don't lose anything by Trump being president. They are completely out of touch with their base. "Let them eat Perez!" They scream from the rooftops. They go around with their million dollar fundraisers from Sachs and Morgan while the blacks are getting shot in the street and the Latinos round up and deported. They fiddle while Rome burns. They fail to see the importance of what is going on. They are stuck in the past. In the days of politicking and power plays. Those days are loving gone. "But we're the real party of the minority!" They say. Yeah and I'm sure their housekeepers are all Hispanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Fiction posted:His job being the fundraiser means he has a lot of sway on the whole process that can be leveraged to help a certain set of candidates. Don't play dumb on this. I don't think you really grasp that Ellison isn't some far-left not-even-really-democrat politician who's not going to play the game too. ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Exactly how relevant is Nevada? Okay you're an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Dude, loving everyone in the goddamn party hated DWS. Yes the party hated her so much that they gave her a position in the Clinton campaign as well as sent Joe Biden down to help her beat off her (Sanders-supported) primary challenger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I don't think you really grasp that Ellison isn't some far-left not-even-really-democrat politician who's not going to play the game too. I grasp it well. I'm saying I and people like me trust Ellison more than Perez to play the game in a way that actually reflects how voters feel, and not how Haim Saban feels.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Exactly how relevant is Nevada? I mean, we actually need more unions. They definitely aren't dead. They helped win the fight for $15 in multiple states. If you go to any leftist meeting, they are filled with unions. I don't think Perez being close to labor is the issue...
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Yes the party hated her so much that they gave her a position in the Clinton campaign as well as sent Joe Biden down to help her beat off her (Sanders-supported) primary challenger. Her position was window dressing to get her to shut up and go away. Podesta loathed her; but whatever makes you happy to continue trying to make this some kind of proxy for a primary that y'all lost a year ago. Fiction posted:I grasp it well. I'm saying I and people like me trust Ellison more than Perez to play the game in a way that actually reflects how voters feel, and not how Haim Saban feels. And you're gloriously deluding yourselves, again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Her position was window dressing to get her to shut up and go away. A seat in the Senate is window dressing, folks. You heard it here first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Summarized your post. Really don't think ya did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:He was the Labor Secretary for the President who approved it? But are you also just saying that support for a trade agreement is unilaterally bad? Or do you have specific criticisms about TPP that are actually real and valid. And how does support for a trade agreement effect the role of the chair of the DNC, who's job is mostly raising money to fund the party activities? While I agree it's not relevant to the topic of selecting the DNC chair (especially in this specific case), I don't like this line of arguing. It's true that a very large portion (possibly most) of people against TPP don't really know what they're talking about or have any concrete criticism of it. But it is absolutely true that it would have done a bunch of bad stuff (alongside some good stuff, though my personal feeling is the bad outweighs the good). There was an article on (I think) Vox that did a decent job of summarizing its pros/cons. Calling out a person on their ignorance isn't proof that they're necessarily wrong. (Also I would argue that unless the pros very obviously outweigh the cons, which isn't the case with the TPP, the default assumption when it comes to trade deals and other business/finance-related policy should be that it's intended to enrich investors/corporations.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:A seat in the Senate is window dressing, folks. You heard it here first. Uh. Ytlaya posted:While I agree it's not relevant to the topic of selecting the DNC chair (especially in this specific case), I don't like this line of arguing. It's true that a very large portion (possibly most) of people against TPP don't really know what they're talking about or have any concrete criticism of it. But it is absolutely true that it would have done a bunch of bad stuff (alongside some good stuff, though my personal feeling is the bad outweighs the good). There was an article on (I think) Vox that did a decent job of summarizing its pros/cons. Calling out a person on their ignorance isn't proof that they're necessarily wrong. I mean, this isn't really the thread for a discussion on the merits or demerits of a trade deal, which is kind of the point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:And you're gloriously deluding yourselves, again. What is delusional about trusting Ellison over Perez based on their records as I've described?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I don't think you really grasp that Ellison isn't some far-left not-even-really-democrat politician who's not going to play the game too. No you're the idiot. In fact you are insane. Your leadership has lost every single major election since 2008, placed this country on the edge of a precipice and you keep asking for the same old poo poo to be shoveled into your mouth year after year. People are tired of feckless career politicians who have no connection with the electorate and no clue how to win elections. The DNC needs a radical change. Obamas greatest legacy is his failure to lead his party and once you get your head out of your rear end and his cult of personality you will realize the American people deserve better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
i'd like to take this moment to remind folks that unions are one of the most consistent supporters for better pay and working conditions for people of color For example, do you know that four out of ten USPS employees are minorities? USPS is also heavily unionized, and consistently targeted by the GOP because of it
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
NNick posted:I mean, we actually need more unions. They definitely aren't dead. They helped win the fight for $15 in multiple states. If you go to any leftist meeting, they are filled with unions. There isn't a single union in my state.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Fiction posted:I grasp it well. I'm saying I and people like me trust Ellison more than Perez to play the game in a way that actually reflects how voters feel, and not how Haim Saban feels. Haim Saban doesn't vote?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Fiction posted:What is delusional about trusting Ellison over Perez based on their records as I've described? Ellision is as much a creature of the establishment democratic power base (if not more) than Perez. He's supported by the loving Senate Majority leader. (And reminder, for the like tenth time in the last three pages, I support Ellison!) ISeeCuckedPeople posted:No you're the idiot. In fact you are insane. Your leadership has lost every single major election since 2008, placed this country on the edge of a precipice and you keep asking for the same old poo poo to be shoveled into your mouth year after year. Ah yes, dude who thinks we shouldn't try and build unions. Tell me more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Chelb posted:i'd like to take this moment to remind folks that unions are one of the most consistent supporters for better pay and working conditions for people of color Meanwhile in the real world. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Haim Saban doesn't vote? His single issue and the fact he has millions shouldn't overwhelm the voice of thousands of others .
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
ISeeCuckedPeople posted:Meanwhile in the real world. So we should just abandon that. We shouldn't work to try and reverse this course because [______________________]
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
i like the question of "why are you guys trying to turn this into a proxy war?" because it belies the order of events beautifully. sanders came out for ellison shortly after the election and the sanders wing immediately jumped onboard and got hype for an inner party administrative election. suddenly voters cared about who filled this slot and what this position actually does. THEN obama endorsed Perez and suddenly "its a close fight!" if their policies are so similar why even put perez forth in the first place? there's a motivated wing of your party jumping on anything politics and rather then try to harness that energy and give them a win to bring them into the fold you run your own "identical" candidate and then lambast anyone who still supports ellison because "they're the same." if they were the same there would be no point in running perez. but people aren't stupid. we see perez running and he comes from an administration that people are more and more realizing was full of poo poo and seems to represent a wing of the party that people feel has been trying to hoodwink them for years. the establishment wing began the "proxy war." they couldn't bear to see a sanders backed nominee succeed and instead put forth their own candidate. there is absolutely a war going on for the future of the democratic party and say what you will about the left, but the centrists are fighting just as much and just as hard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Obama hasn't endorsed Perez. "The Democratic Party should abandon unions" isn't a position any DNC chair has suggested, and it's frankly insane. If you want to argue about that, make some other thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:Obama hasn't endorsed Perez. But you see, the RT, RAW STORY and my head cannon of events....
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:So we should just abandon that. We shouldn't work to try and reverse this course because [______________________] Good luck especially now that we are getting national right to work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I mean, this isn't really the thread for a discussion on the merits or demerits of a trade deal, which is kind of the point. I know, I was just referring to your "Or do you have specific criticisms about TPP that are actually real and valid" which seems to imply that there aren't any "actually real and valid" criticisms. I see this sort of arguing strategy a lot (especially against leftists), where someone assumes that if the person they're talking to doesn't have a good reason for what they believe, what they believe must be wrong. It's especially annoying when people are now just a single Google search away from finding a well-reasoned argument made by someone who has some idea what they're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Frankly, if Obama endorsed a candidate, there wouldn't be any race.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:His single issue and the fact he has millions shouldn't overwhelm the voice of thousands of others . Characterizing a Jewish person as a phony infiltrator attempting to hijack politics from real Americans is sketchy. So is using terms like "donor class", and singling out Jewish people as exemplars of this "donor class" that apparently is distinct from the bourgeoisie. There are perfectly innocent explanations, I am sure, but y'all can't control your fool mouths for long enough to throw some bloodthirstiness at auto execs alongside "unmanly" industries like finance and entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Haim Saban doesn't vote? Haim Saban's money is worth many votes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:
The numbers do not back your assertion about how people feel about the Obama administration. And stop viewing this in terms of "Wings." This isn't Game of Thrones, this is a dull process of selecting someone to raise money and bug you with emails. Save your attention for something that actually matters. Personally, I would be happy with either as DNC chair, but am leaning towards Ellison.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:42 |
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Characterizing a Jewish person as a phony infiltrator attempting to hijack politics from real Americans is sketchy. So is using terms like "donor class", and singling out Jewish people as exemplars of this "donor class" that apparently is distinct from the bourgeoisie. There are perfectly innocent explanations, I am sure, but y'all can't control your fool mouths for long enough to throw some bloodthirstiness at auto execs alongside "unmanly" industries like finance and entertainment. Hey, as an anti-Zionist Jew, go gently caress yourself for this argument. Many of us are very unhappy with the stranglehold that wealthy people have on Democratic politics and it has nothing to do with being Jewish or unmanly or something insane like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 18:52
|
|