|
Fiction posted:Oh yeah, the continued existence of any form of socialized benefits is definitely a conclusive sign that the Democrats won't tuck their tail between their legs and run from any attempt to help people that might imperil their donors' stock options. You understand that Reagan and Reaganism involves destroying the social safety net and social welfare? Because if you do then you appear to be unable to say what you mean but instead wobble drunkenly around it.
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
please remember to virtue signal at least twenty yards before making a turn
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I realize this is a joke, but leftists should be organizing now for the elections in the coming cycle. they are. dunno why you guys are pretending people aren't organizing. likewise, just because i stop voting for or supporting the dems doesn't mean i'm not organizing, it just means i'm organizing against the republicans AND the dems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You understand that Reagan and Reaganism involves destroying the social safety net and social welfare? Harming those things WAS the effective result of Clinton's welfare "reform."
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:they are. dunno why you guys are pretending people aren't organizing. likewise, just because i stop voting for or supporting the dems doesn't mean i'm not organizing, it just means i'm organizing against the republicans AND the dems. Have fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:they are. dunno why you guys are pretending people aren't organizing. likewise, just because i stop voting for or supporting the dems doesn't mean i'm not organizing, it just means i'm organizing against the republicans AND the dems. Because third party organization will not make a difference in the next four years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Have fun. i will. the dems are a dead party and need to be replaced
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Because third party organization will not make a difference in the next four years. neither will democrats at this rate. so what's your point?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Harming those things WAS the effective result of Clinton's welfare "reform." IF CLINTON AND THE REST OF THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP WERE JUST REAGAN TWO THEY WOULD HAVE DESTROYED ADC COMPLETELY YOU SMARMY SACK OF poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Condiv posted:neither will democrats at this rate. so what's your point? If the Trump Administration continues at the present rate of own-goals you are most certainly wrong. Especially when the other options are myriad tiny socialist parties and Jill "Russian puppet" Stein.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:IF CLINTON AND THE REST OF THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP WERE JUST REAGAN TWO THEY WOULD HAVE DESTROYED ADC COMPLETELY YOU SMARMY SACK OF poo poo. They weren't Reagan II. They were Diet Reagan. Reagan Lite. Hence why all their triangulation flew flat the gently caress on its face once Clinton left office and there were no charismatic faces to sell "more benefits for the rich."
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i will. the dems are a dead party and need to be replaced build a mighty suit of armor from their bones, imo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:What I'm saying is that the left needs to start actively organizing, not voting third-party once every four years while smugly patting themselves on the back for doing their part to destroy capitalism. And although I say "needs to" in the present tense, it really needed to start doing that thirty years ago. The fact that the left stood around with their thumbs up their asses doing nothing for the last couple of decades while both parties collaborated to destroy them is exactly why I don't have any faith at all in the current progressive "revolution" - it's way too top-down. There's plenty of outrage on the bottom, but it steadfastly refuses to organize itself into something meaningful; it just sits around waiting for somebody to tell it what to do, just like the Tea Party did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:If the Trump Administration continues at the present rate of own-goals you are most certainly wrong. you know the dems need to be effective in 2 years right? you realize how close to actually dead the dem party is right? and the leadership of that party is choosing to sit on their rear end instead of fight back, so I very much doubt the dems will be sucessful in 2020 even with trump's help. hell, trump owned himself constantly during his campaign and helped the dems immensely and they still lost in 2016
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Fiction posted:They weren't Reagan II. They were Diet Reagan. Reagan Lite. Hence why all their triangulation flew flat the gently caress on its face once Clinton left office and there were no charismatic faces to sell "more benefits for the rich." So were you lying when you said the parties were identical or lying now? Which is it, motherfucker?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:What I'm saying is that the left needs to start actively organizing, not voting third-party once every four years while smugly patting themselves on the back for doing their part to destroy capitalism. And although I say "needs to" in the present tense, it really needed to start doing that thirty years ago. The fact that the left stood around with their thumbs up their asses doing nothing for the last couple of decades while both parties collaborated to destroy them is exactly why I don't have any faith at all in the current progressive "revolution" - it's way too top-down. There's plenty of outrage on the bottom, but it steadfastly refuses to organize itself into something meaningful; it just sits around waiting for somebody to tell it what to do, just like the Tea Party did. well, i think you're downplaying, or possibly misunderstanding, just how effectively the left has been smashed. yes the left needed organizing 40 years ago when wages started stagnating the left lost its influence on the democratic party but what happened right before 40 years ago? there was a social revolution and a quasi-civil war raging throughout the country. this is where the left was smashed. it had institutions, organization, and the ability to effect change and it was directly challenged and mitigated through actions of the state and the upper classes that started funding counter-revolutionary institutions of their own. so i don't think its any coincidence that "hey, right after the left was smashed the left really should have been organizing" because of course they should have been organizing but they had virtually no means of doing so. there were and are major impediments to effective leftist organization. still, i want to emphasize that you're right that organization is key, and difficulty doesn't mean its impossible. its just that one of the reasons it hasn't been happening in the first place is that its been made extremely difficult to do so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i will. the dems are a dead party and need to be replaced Alright. So you're posting in the DNC Chair thread, why?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
FICTION YOU PATHETIC MILKSOP. YOU BLOATED PIEBALD DONKEY. CLINTON WAS NOT THE THING YOU SAID, SHE WAS ANOTHER THING ENTIRELY
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Condiv posted:you know the dems need to be effective in 2 years right? you realize how close to actually dead the dem party is right? and the leadership of that party is choosing to sit on their rear end instead of fight back, so I very much doubt the dems will be sucessful in 2020 even with trump's help. hell, trump owned himself constantly during his campaign and helped the dems immensely and they still lost in 2016 So then who cares who is DNC chair? Either the Democrats will matter, and then the DNC chair matters, or they don't and they won't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So were you lying when you said the parties were identical or lying now? Which is it, motherfucker? You reading way way too much into turns of phrase is not the same as me lying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
Condiv posted:neither will democrats at this rate. so what's your point? This is a statement that shows pretty stupendous ignorance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Like if you dont supprts the democratic party and its platform, thats fine. Talk about it elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Anything I missed in the jump of posts?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Alright. So you're posting in the DNC Chair thread, why? cause i'm still rooting for ellison to win and the dems to wake the gently caress up? i really don't want to have to abandon the party that my parents were a member of, and my grandparents, as well as myself all my life. Lightning Knight posted:So then who cares who is DNC chair? DNC chair is a good measure of whether or not the dems are waking up and actually going to fight, or if they're going to double-down on the failed policies and strategies that have led us to the repubs having nearly enough control to amend the constitution on their own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Abrasive Obelisk posted:Anything I missed in the jump of posts? Nope
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
i think the current democratic platform is p alright for a mainstream party and time would be better spent holding them to it rather than pulling a houdini, but i am also a massive unironic neoliberal shrill hill shill so what do i know
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Fiction posted:You reading way way too much into turns of phrase is not the same as me lying. Okay, so both statements are lies, since you admit you have no interest in writing truthfully. Is this cavalier attitude to honesty something that all leftists must adopt now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:i think the current democratic platform is p alright for a mainstream party and time would be better spent holding them to it rather than pulling a houdini, but i am also a massive unironic neoliberal shrill hill shill so what do i know The platform is fine but the party members in charge of implementing it are a bunch of jelly spine quislings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Condiv posted:cause i'm still rooting for ellison to win and the dems to wake the gently caress up? i really don't want to have to abandon the party that my parents were a member of, and my grandparents, as well as myself all my life. Don't you live in, like, Oklahoma? Go run for party office. Seriously. Who the gently caress is gonna compete with you? You'd probably do fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Condiv posted:cause i'm still rooting for ellison to win and the dems to wake the gently caress up? i really don't want to have to abandon the party that my parents were a member of, and my grandparents, as well as myself all my life. This is real dumb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/race-dnc-chair-heads-behind-closed-doors-final-stretch-n721011 There's no reasonable way to tell who is winning, but both Ellison and Perez claim to be winning. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:i feel like this is a really harsh indictment of the left. the left is weak and directionless because the levers of power have been used to destroy all of the left's traditional institutions. What the gently caress are you talking about? Mainstream dems have never once cut ties with religious groups, it's the self described left that includes the "smash the religious lie" poo poo heads who want to just tell those believers how much smarter believing in Marx is. Crowsbeak posted:Tis better then voting for a bunch of cowards who would let Muslims go to camps because they need some sweet wall street money. No no, if we even think they might not constantly say that anyone making more than $20,000 a year needs to be killed, better to give that seat to the tea party, cause MAAAAAAAH PUUUUUUUUUUUUHHRRRRRRIIIIIIIITYYYYYY! Crowsbeak posted:Yes Keith Elllison is a noted panderer to white supremacists. I love the logic of centrists. Its kind of why of the past five elections counting mid terms they have lost three. Yes, because you are acting like a whiny little bitch who cannot loving stand that the very clear majority of people chose someone over you, even after conceding virtually every bit of the platform, and invent a delusional boogeyman who rigged the process then throws the world's future down the toilet to punish it for daring to not agree with you. Alter Ego posted:For the last time--Perez wouldn't even be in the race if the Obama people hadn't asked him to run out of "fear" that Keith Ellison would become chairman. Was this before or after he used Chem trails to make frogs gay? Kilroy posted:Maybe the first step to doing that is to cease the endless attempts at conciliation with a Democratic party that clearly wants them to have no influence on the platform or the party but expects their votes anyway? You're right that unions came from bottom-up organization - and they are being systematic destroyed by Democrats arm-in-arm with Republicans, from the top down. Maybe leftists don't want to be a part of that anymore and maybe the election of Perez will be just another in a long list of clear indicators that the left has no actual place in the Democratic party. Let Nancy "We Are Capitalists, Period" Pelosi and her ilk have it. Ah yes, I too remember all the Dems who have pushed through right to work legislation. Remember when Obama signed that bill into law while cackling and holding up a middle finger to a weeping white man in a construction helmet? Dems are totally the same you guys. Lightning Knight posted:Because third party organization will not make a difference in the next four years. No, it will. I'm sure if it's organised enough it can completely undermine any hope of a Dem wave and hand control to Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
I dont want to abandon the party i love over the office of city dogcatcher, but i will if i have to. There is too much at stake, symbolically
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Was this before or after he used Chem trails to make frogs gay? After, of course. Why do you ask? And by the way--Democratic waves are useless unless the right people are elected in it, as we learned in 2006 and 2008.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:i think the current democratic platform is p alright for a mainstream party and time would be better spent holding them to it rather than pulling a houdini, but i am also a massive unironic neoliberal shrill hill shill so what do i know i'd prefer that option too. too bad establishment dems are going to stonewall any attempt at change Lightning Knight posted:Don't you live in, like, Oklahoma? i live abroad now, but yeah my home state is oklahoma. i've thought about maybe moving home and trying to run for office, but i'd like to at least get my PhD first. party office isn't as much as a problem cause the current chair of the ok dems is receptive to the sanders wing and is voting for ellison.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Neither Perez or Ellision are going to change anything major. Ellison becoming chair doesn't result in the DNC stop taking money from big banks, it doesnt stop the DNC from clearing fields where it makes sense. It doesnt change primary rules. Theyre both supported by a cross section of various party factions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Condiv i was going to say youre being defeatist but upon seeing that you lived in Oklahoma i suddenly cannot blame you
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
i think people put way too much faith in "the platform" you'd think after obama people would realize that plans don't mean poo poo and its about getting people who will actually try to do things say what you will about the republicans, but the ones who don't try to repeal obamacare 128 times or whatever get primaried out for the ones who will anyway, when i see the argument "their platforms are identical" that just naturally leads me to ask the next question of "ok, well then who's more likely to accomplish/fight for their platform" instead of saying "oh, well then they're exactly the same i guess"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You understand that Reagan and Reaganism involves destroying the social safety net and social welfare? Because if you do then you appear to be unable to say what you mean but instead wobble drunkenly around it. You don't say https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Social_Security.htm Fulchrum posted:
Multiply that number by 10 to the fourth power. Fulchrum posted:
I voted for Hillary, but then she lost. You can't admit that she was an incompetent who lost to Orange Peron, and don't think she did anything wrong. Or the policies she and Bill supported caused any of this. Despite all the evidence to the contrary. But keep stacking the deck. Keep disrespecting us. maybe next time we will just not vote. Let Trump have an actual landslide victory. But hten you guys are too far up your own asses to actually admit that you're idols wrecked this country and we need to appeal to the working class.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
Condiv posted:i'd prefer that option too. too bad establishment dems are going to stonewall any attempt at change Yes, they will cunningly undercut all these progressive ideas by....adopting all of them. It's foolproof- you stop all change by changing it to what people were demanding. It's foolproof.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2017 20:18
|
|