|
zegermans posted:This will never happen because the left doesn't vote lockstep like the right does, given the left's ability to think independently and achieve personal belief sets that haven't been delivered by Fox News/Breitbart. I'm so glad that we can remain morally smug and superior while still getting our asses handed to us. It really shows how much better we are. We should all give ourselves another pat on the back.
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:28 |
|
|
Beyond whatever faction of the party he represents, Perez has done nothing but stumble from one unforced gently caress up to another over the past couple of months. He is going to be shoved in front of the cameras a lot the next few years and it feels pretty inevitable that he is going to say some real stupid poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powe...75fc_story.html Another article on that meeting telling Bernie to stop being so mean quote:Manchin insisted on Tuesday that the Democratic caucus is “unified in not wanting to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It’s unified! So why would [protesters] spend any energy on any member who’s already committed to that? They might not like those of us who come from other parts of the country that doesn’t adhere to everything they say or want done, but on the big items, put your energy somewhere else. Bernie can deliver that message better than anybody else.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
They know the people want Bernie and it's killing them
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
Cinnamon Bear posted:I'm so glad that we can remain morally smug and superior while still getting our asses handed to us. It really shows how much better we are. We should all give ourselves another pat on the back. have you read this thread at all
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
♫ And I don't really care if nobody else belieeeeves ♫
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
*nobody else = WI, MI, PA etc
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
As up his own rear end as I think Adam Curtis can be, he put into words the way I feel about Democrats in a pretty succinct way during his interview with Chapo Trap House. Liberals are terrified because their ideology is predicated on a world that doesn't change of its own accord, or at least not to any major degree. Stability is a necessity for incrementalist politics to be palatable, and the illusion of an essentially stable world is starting to come apart at the seams. Leftists, on the other hand, seem to be terrified of really losing themselves in a big idea. Curtis talked about how you have to decide how much change you want, and come to grips with the fact that big change might make your life worse, and that you have to make peace with that moving forward if you really want to change the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Rastor posted:[thinking face] 🤔🤔🤔
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Penisaurus Sex posted:As up his own rear end as I think Adam Curtis can be, he put into words the way I feel about Democrats in a pretty succinct way during his interview with Chapo Trap House. we won't see any real change until people have lost everything and have nowhere else to go but forward but capitalism ensures that people retain just enough basic poo poo that they'll always find something they can't lose and will therefore never rise up
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Serf posted:we won't see any real change until people have lost everything and have nowhere else to go but forward I disagree, to some extent. The best lesson of history is that you don't need everyone to be a part of a revolution for it to succeed. You only need enough, and enough in America might be as low as a million or two, and there are absolutely that many terrified people in America today. The problem, if you're interested in a revolution and a replacement of American society rather than a change in the current system, is that 'enough' is incredibly vague and impossible to really analyze. No one knows when a protest turns into something more unless you have the benefit of looking backwards in time. Penisaurus Sex has issued a correction as of 16:21 on Feb 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
it doesn't really matter who is chair because it's just as feasible to threaten to tea party primary candidates under anybody, even the butt gieg
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Fiction posted:it doesn't really matter who is chair because it's just as feasible to threaten to tea party primary candidates under anybody, even the butt gieg Voters have the power, not the elected officials, and when Democratic voters realize that again we'll see some real change. I would really like Manchin to get primaried by someone, anyone though; he makes me really ashamed to be a WV resident.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Fiction posted:it doesn't really matter who is chair because it's just as feasible to threaten to tea party primary candidates under anybody, even the butt gieg this is ultimately what needs to happen, problem is that we need to wait a year an a half for that to happen and poo poo is happening much faster than in other presidencies
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
So is the DSA plan to coopt the dem party or just start fresh?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
zegermans posted:So is the DSA plan to coopt the dem party or just start fresh? DSA is entryist
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
The Washington Post is reporting that six Republicans are uneasy about Puzder. "On Tuesday, Sens. Rob Portman (Ohio) and John Thune (S.D.) told reporters that they’re not willing to support Puzder yet and will wait to see how he fares at his hearing. They join four other GOP senators — Susan Collins (Maine), Johnny Isakson (Ga.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Tim Scott (S.C.) — in publicly voicing reservations." Fairly certain even Manchin will hold the line.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Fiction posted:it doesn't really matter who is chair because it's just as feasible to threaten to tea party primary candidates under anybody, even the butt gieg Given the bad Dem's track record, someone like Perez is more liable to use the DNC to fight against the primary challenges than Ellison or Buttigieg. zegermans posted:So is the DSA plan to coopt the dem party or just start fresh? That's what the chair election is going to decide.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Given the bad Dem's track record, someone like Perez is more liable to use the DNC to fight against the primary challenges than Ellison or Buttigieg. I recall it being a thing last year that incumbents were given a lot more institutional support than non-incumbents during the primaries. The DNC chair has a lot of influence over that so who wins definitely will have an impact on who ends up running in 2018 in at least some races. Plus this is the first highly visible internal election since the Dems got wrecked last November, so signalling whether they're doubling down on the third way or going a new direction will also show possible candidates what direction the party is headed and influence whether they decide to run.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
zegermans posted:So is the DSA plan to coopt the dem party or just start fresh? coopt
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Anawnnemus/status/831897096370475010
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
zegermans posted:So is the DSA plan to coopt the dem party or just start fresh? i'm hoping it results in some sort of dual power situation and then we have an october revolution
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
if perez is elected i'm probably going to stop bothering with the democrats and just vote for DSA approved candidates. it seems like the dems think they can win again by just being the not-trump in 2020. they may be right, but it's a terrible idea and will just make sure more trumps are elected in the future. thanks dems for being asleep at the wheel while the nation howls for change
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
this video but at the last second a navy seal shoots lisa in the neck
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
zegermans posted:So is the DSA plan to coopt the dem party or just start fresh? I'd hope coopt, they're not radical enough to appeal to the genuine fringe groups (who, spoiler alert, don't vote anyway because they're pretty sure the jew robots have already rigged the results or whatever) and as a third party most of their shine would be taken the green crowd.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
Al! posted:this video but at the last second a navy seal shoots lisa in the neck Then lets her bleed out
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
zegermans posted:Then lets her bleed out then gets riddled in turn by friendly fire from other seals that are trying to gun down marge
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
it pisses me off that the dems need the left part of their base to win, but absolutely refuse to give any concessions or do anything to try to appeal to that base. if the dems want to chase republican voters then go ahead, just don't get mad at leftists for not supporting your rightward slide
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
I'm gonna make my own political party with blackjack and hookers
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Condiv posted:it pisses me off that the dems need the left part of their base to win, but absolutely refuse to give any concessions or do anything to try to appeal to that base. if the dems want to chase republican voters then go ahead, just don't get mad at leftists for not supporting your rightward slide Hill spent the last election chasing Republicans and LOOK WHERE THAT loving GOT US
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
UHD posted:I'm gonna make my own political party Libertarians already exist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
Al! posted:this video but at the last second a navy seal shoots lisa in the neck
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
LOLing at the part of this where Congress reacts to a corruption scandal by actually acting on it rather than turning desperately to damage control, then doesn't give themselves a pay raise
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Condiv posted:it pisses me off that the dems need the left part of their base to win, but absolutely refuse to give any concessions or do anything to try to appeal to that base. if the dems want to chase republican voters then go ahead, just don't get mad at leftists for not supporting your rightward slide I feel like there were multiple concessions in the DNC platform and the left maligned it for not being exactly like Bernie's. It's not a question of offering concessions, it's a question of unconditional surrender. an actual dog posted:Hill spent the last election chasing Republicans and LOOK WHERE THAT loving GOT US Out of all the dumb poo poo she did, this was the stupidest possible decision. They bought every GOP dogwhistle where they pretend to be about family values and rule of law and all that bullshit, when all most GOP voters care about is sticking it to the Other. She could run ads all day long showing how Trump was a sexist sexual predator con-man, but he had the religious right the instant he dehumanized Hispanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
zegermans posted:I feel like there were multiple concessions in the DNC platform and the left maligned it for not being exactly like Bernie's. It's not a question of offering concessions, it's a question of unconditional surrender. "SINGLE PAYER WILL NEVER EVER HAPPEN!!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
zegermans posted:I feel like there were multiple concessions in the DNC platform and the left maligned it for not being exactly like Bernie's. It's not a question of offering concessions, it's a question of unconditional surrender. ya, and they should
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
full communism now
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
zegermans posted:I feel like there were multiple concessions in the DNC platform and the left maligned it for not being exactly like Bernie's. It's not a question of offering concessions, it's a question of unconditional surrender. Nobody believed it would be implemented. A platform isn't worth any more than the person behind it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
zegermans posted:I feel like there were multiple concessions in the DNC platform and the left maligned it for not being exactly like Bernie's. It's not a question of offering concessions, it's a question of unconditional surrender. There's a very clear distinction between saying something and doing something. Hillary made it very clear she was fine with one, but I don't imagine for a second she'd be fine with both, nor do I think most Democrats would be. That's a fundamental misreading of what the Democratic party is and who it is for; I'm not mad at them for it, but I also don't expect them to ever be a true worker's party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:28 |
|
|
also yes, the fuckups that have gotten us into this should surrender unconditionally. they got donald loving trump elected, why should they get a single goddamn thing
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 17:29
|
|