|
Alter Ego posted:I believe that Perez as DNC chair represents the old guard desperately clinging to power, but if he wins and immediately comes out of the gate swinging on voter registration drives, pushing back on voter suppression, and getting more involved at the state and local level, I will be more than happy to admit I was wrong. This is not an empty quote.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:They get hit with the " all prices will go up by $X" talking points, so to voters, yes. Yet they passed them despite such talking points, in Red States mind you. I do love how centrists claim that the right will just win anyways so we should surrender. No wonder America went for Trump. We got creatures like you to fight to get anything done. Maybe your new Avatar should be Quisling. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Yet they passed them despite such talking points, in Red States mind you. I do love how centrists claim that the right will just win anyways so we should surrender. No wonder America went for Trump. We got creatures like you to fight to get anything done. Maybe your new Avatar should be Quisling. I am pretty sure its the leftists in this thread that have been throwing their hands up every time someone says "maybe that's not the best way to go about it?" and scream like little babies. Stop calling people who generally agree with you on ideology but maybe not exactly a loving quisling. At any rate, nothing is getting done on min wage for at least two and more likely four years so its kind of a moot point to discuss the particulars. What I will say is that should we return to power and min wage becomes an issue, fighting for 15 is fine, but how many of you would turn down $12 if that was within reach but $15 wasn't?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
It's just mind boggling how there's this huge blow-up over $12 vs. $15 when they're both sub-living wages anyways. I just don't understand that level of militancy over leaving profit in the hands of capital while continuing to leave workers struggling to survive. I'm
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's just mind boggling how there's this huge blow-up over $12 vs. $15 when they're both sub-living wages anyways. I mean, the point really should be that we don't want people working at Min Wage. Like most people working min wage shouldn't -- in a just world -- be dependent on that income to survive, but of course we don't live in that fantasy land.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I am pretty sure its the leftists in this thread that have been throwing their hands up every time someone says "maybe that's not the best way to go about it?" and scream like little babies. Stop calling people who generally agree with you on ideology but maybe not exactly a loving quisling. fulchrum's ideology seems to be that only republican ideas can win so why brother trying. Seems like a quisling to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I am pretty sure its the leftists in this thread that have been throwing their hands up every time someone says "maybe that's not the best way to go about it?" and scream like little babies. Stop calling people who generally agree with you on ideology but maybe not exactly a loving quisling. Yeah I never said turn down 12. ALso I will call anyone who says something is impossible is a quisling when the very things they say are impossible pass in red states. WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's just mind boggling how there's this huge blow-up over $12 vs. $15 when they're both sub-living wages anyways. Well yes what really should be pushed is workers being able to buy shares of their companies and then take them over. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
We don't believe you should earn enough to survive, vote for us we the party of labor. Huh no one turned out okay that was too far left, what if we promise you even worse pay, hey where are you going? Okay how about even worse pay, do you like us now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:We don't believe you should earn enough to survive, vote for us we the party of labor. Huh no one turned out okay that was too far left, what if we promise you even worse pay, hey where are you going? It's interesting to note how this is anti-materialist- instead of dealing with the possibility that people, for various reasons of false consciousness, generally reject the idea of increasing the minimum wage to a living wage and moving on from there, it is assumed that all people must automatically agree with you, and if there are no visible signs of that, well there's obviously some sort of conspiracy to hide the truth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:We don't believe you should earn enough to survive, vote for us we the party of labor. Huh no one turned out okay that was too far left, what if we promise you even worse pay, hey where are you going? Yeah, the core of the issue is narrative building and triangulation robs the Democrats of anything to really stand for beyond being the only alternative to has become a increasingly hard to far-right GOP. Trump (or really his backers) was able to sell a narrative that didn't make necessarily logical sense but it had emotional power and preyed on the either the hope or hatred of segments of the population. If the Democratic Party is simply for whatever polls 60%+ then it doesn't really have a narrative and is a shell of a big tent party that tries to appeal to what is theoretically popular but doesn't have anything to drive what theoretically should be its base to the polls. Granted, if you are someone who already leans a bit center-right on economic issues this is fine because in all honesty the Democrats are going to get very little done and won't rock the boat, maybe a few social issues will be pushed and thats about it. Obama wasn't a radical by any stretch but he certainly had a narrative to sell people even if the results were minimal. The problem is Obama is a likable politician and a brilliant campaigner, something that is extremely rare nowadays. In reality it is a system I don't think has much of a future, especially since the population is silently becoming more hostile to the status quo but has no real electoral outlet for their frustration (expect someone like Trump).
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Yeah, the core of the issue is narrative building and triangulation robs the Democrats of anything to really stand for beyond being the only alternative to has become a increasingly hard to far-right GOP. Trump (or really his backers) was able to sell a narrative that didn't make necessarily logical sense but it had emotional power and preyed on the either the hope or hatred of segments of the population. So, what you believe is that if the Democrats had an ideology, they would be able to easily get the mass of people, who are non-ideological, to go along with it. Why is this more believable than that the mass of people in the US do have an ideology, and there are simply more racists and liberals than communists or anarchists? Because it would delegitimize the whole notion of being "populist" to win votes? Because it would suggest that people don't automatically conceive of themselves as the proletariat or bourgeoisie first, before any other factors of self?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So, what you believe is that if the Democrats had an ideology, they would be able to easily get the mass of people, who are non-ideological, to go along with it. Yes, and that's so obvious and provable that I have to wonder if you've paid much attention to politics over the last 30 years. Why do you think the Republican message is so successful, despite the fact that it's an obvious lie? Brainiac Five posted:It's interesting to note how this is anti-materialist- instead of dealing with the possibility that people, for various reasons of false consciousness, generally reject the idea of increasing the minimum wage to a living wage and moving on from there, it is assumed that all people must automatically agree with you, and if there are no visible signs of that, well there's obviously some sort of conspiracy to hide the truth. What the gently caress are you talking about? Nobody is saying anyone automatically agrees with anything, the complaint is that the default centrist position is to throw up your hands, go with the status quo and not bother trying to change anyone's mind about anything. Centrists are dismissive of the idea that it's possible to change public opinion, while complaining at the same time that Republicans have turned public opinion against them. Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Yes, and that's so obvious and provable that I have to wonder if you've paid much attention to politics over the last 30 years. Why do you think the Republican message is so successful, despite the fact that it's an obvious lie? Because it's well in line with various ideological beliefs people hold. Beliefs about the superiority of white Americans, beliefs about the inherent suspicious character of government, beliefs about how they're totally independent of other people, or could be when not held down by government. Beliefs about how America is a classless society. Beliefs that women and men each have their places and must stick to it. Belief that freedom comes from lack of limits. Most relevantly, beliefs about how existence is zero-sum and so anything which hurts other people is equivalent to helping you. Dr. Fishopolis posted:What the gently caress are you talking about? Nobody is saying anyone automatically agrees with anything, the complaint is that the default centrist position is to throw up your hands, go with the status quo and not bother trying to change anyone's mind about anything. Centrists are dismissive of the idea that it's possible to change public opinion, while complaining at the same time that Republicans have turned public opinion against them. Well, here's the thing. While nyou, fursonally, might be well aware that changing public opinion isn't generally done by having the Party dictate things, other people apparently nyare not, since they are presenting this nyas totally a matter of internal party politics. Nyas opposed to politics outside of the party, bottom-up politics. Brainiac Five fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Yes, and that's so obvious and provable that I have to wonder if you've paid much attention to politics over the last 30 years. Why do you think the Republican message is so successful, despite the fact that it's an obvious lie? Yet the consequence is that they can't really govern.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/832995713596399617
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Maybe Democrats should stand for something instead of voting to invade Iraq for no reason other than it's showing >51% in the polls.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:What the gently caress are you talking about? Nobody is saying anyone automatically agrees with anything, the complaint is that the default centrist position is to throw up your hands, go with the status quo and not bother trying to change anyone's mind about anything. Centrists are dismissive of the idea that it's possible to change public opinion, while complaining at the same time that Republicans have turned public opinion against them. To be fair, the most honest explanation is that centrists probably just don't want to rock the boat too much and they aren't necessarily confused or "ignorant" but center-left reformism is something they actively don't want. it is also why this forum regularly erupts in such acrimony, because there are actual fundamental differences between various factions in American politics but we simply don't have the vocabulary to identify them beyond "liberal" or the "left" even when it actually is much more complicated. Someone can strongly support gay marriage and not want to raise minimum wages and if anything the reverse if possible. If anything the two party system in the country really did melt our minds a bit and has made it very difficult to get a read on what is actually occurring beyond the "left" and "right." I mean if 50% of the population supports a $15 minimum wage, is that something really "left-wing" or basically everyone from the far-left to the center supports?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Maybe Democrats should stand for something instead of voting to invade Iraq for no reason other than it's showing >51% in the polls. Wow, they voted to invade Iraq AGAIN?! Jesus Christ! Maybe people could, instead of obsessively focusing on the past until they develop major depression, focus on learning from it and on understanding how politics in a democracy works?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
pretty hosed up that Ellison's making shady smoke-filled backroom deals to clear the field tbqh
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
It's kind of fascinating to see people seesaw between "Democrats need to be populist" and "Democrats need to ignore the desires of their constituents".
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
pretty cool the Ellison is so persuasive that he can navigate the dnc halls of power and convince people of his vision for the party imo
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Maybe Democrats should stand for something instead of voting to invade Iraq for no reason other than it's showing >51% in the polls. This is pretty silly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Because it's well in line with various ideological beliefs people hold. Beliefs about the superiority of white Americans, beliefs about the inherent suspicious character of government, beliefs about how they're totally independent of other people, or could be when not held down by government. Beliefs about how America is a classless society. Beliefs that women and men each have their places and must stick to it. Belief that freedom comes from lack of limits. Right, exactly. These ideologies are widespread enough to distill and shape into an appealing, easy to digest agenda that people who feel this way can support. The Republicans are so good at this, that they can twist these disparate and often conflicting ideologies into a policy platform that feels so good to support that you don't even care that it's loving you in the eye and sending your children to war. The Democrats are so bad at this that their main appeal is "anything but that poo poo" and yet they still have the majority party enrollment nationwide by 9 or 10 points. The set of ideologies that Republicans prey on is not the majority opinion at all. Brainiac Five posted:Well, here's the thing. While nyou, fursonally, might be well aware that changing public opinion isn't generally done by having the Party dictate things, other people apparently nyare not, since they are presenting this nyas totally a matter of internal party politics. Nyas opposed to politics outside of the party, bottom-up politics. I think I might agree with you but you need to take a break from the computer and go outside.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Yet the consequence is that they can't really govern. Wait, you think the Republicans inability to govern is a result of their messaging? What does this mean?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Wait, you think the Republicans inability to govern is a result of their messaging? What does this mean? It's part of it, yes. They've spent the last twenty years whipping people into such a frenzy that they can't make actual hard choices in governing. ACA Repeal is a perfect example. They know that fully repealing it is a bad political idea, and they know they'd rather replace it with a giant giveaway to rich white people, but they can't even do that now because they've so poisoned the well. So they're stuck. Being rigidly orthodox is, in general, a bad idea for anyone who's serious about governing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Right, exactly. These ideologies are widespread enough to distill and shape into an appealing, easy to digest agenda that people who feel this way can support. The Republicans are so good at this, that they can twist these disparate and often conflicting ideologies into a policy platform that feels so good to support that you don't even care that it's loving you in the eye and sending your children to war. Sure, but that's a problem with having a party that draws on the center and center-left, because you've got two-three different sets of ideological beliefs tugging at the party. The collapse of the postwar liberal order in the late 70s led to domination by centrist notions, and now we're starting to see the revival of ideas from the liberal order and from leftism, but the growing pains are, uh, painful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:To be fair, the most honest explanation is that centrists probably just don't want to rock the boat too much and they aren't necessarily confused or "ignorant" but center-left reformism is something they actively don't want. That's fine. If you genuinely hate the idea of center-left reformism, you're either a Republican or politically apathetic. Either way, you don't belong in the Democratic Party, and the party really shouldn't be wasting time considering your opinion. Sorry!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:It's part of it, yes. They've spent the last twenty years whipping people into such a frenzy that they can't make actual hard choices in governing. ACA Repeal is a perfect example. They know that fully repealing it is a bad political idea, and they know they'd rather replace it with a giant giveaway to rich white people, but they can't even do that now because they've so poisoned the well. So they're stuck. I see your point, but that's a pretty unique scenario. I mean, sure, I agree that the Democrats probably shouldn't stomp their feet and throw a tantrum for 8 years over legislature that they themselves wrote. They also shouldn't then run on repealing said legislature with zero plan for replacing or improving on it. That would certainly be bad for them. I don't think that's a compelling argument against the Democratic party having a coherent ideology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:It's part of it, yes. They've spent the last twenty years whipping people into such a frenzy that they can't make actual hard choices in governing. ACA Repeal is a perfect example. They know that fully repealing it is a bad political idea, and they know they'd rather replace it with a giant giveaway to rich white people, but they can't even do that now because they've so poisoned the well. So they're stuck. Yeah, but then some cetnrists seem to suggest trying to make any change is bad. That is a huge loving problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I see your point, but that's a pretty unique scenario. I mean, sure, I agree that the Democrats probably shouldn't stomp their feet and throw a tantrum for 8 years over legislature that they themselves wrote. They also shouldn't then run on repealing said legislature with zero plan for replacing or improving on it. That would certainly be bad for them. I don't think it's possible to have a large party that is cohesively left. Crowsbeak posted:Yeah, but then some cetnrists seem to suggest trying to make any change is bad. That is a huge loving problem. I think you vastly underestimate the willingness of the american electorate to embrace large scale changes that shift left.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:
I think some centrists think any change whatsoever is impossible and for that they should be ignored. As Fulchrum just showed when he denied that referendums that passed in red states happened.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:That's fine. If you genuinely hate the idea of center-left reformism, you're either a Republican or politically apathetic. Either way, you don't belong in the Democratic Party, and the party really shouldn't be wasting time considering your opinion. Sorry! Sure, of course those centrists also hold a lot of political and economic power especially in coastal cities especially in NYC/DC and the question is how do you actively combat them? A political civil war inside the Democratic Party could very well be extremely ugly...of course our current trajectory is about as bad. Also, yeah they are going to be extremely pissed and politically destructive because they are use to controlling political discourse in the Democratic Party (and with significant influence on the country at large). Devotion to the status quo is its own type of orthodoxy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I think some centrists think any change whatsoever is impossible and for that they should be ignored. As Fulchrum just showed when he denied that referendums that passed in red states happened. I think you spend way too much time shadowboxing a the vast centrist conspiracy to keep your leftist agenda down, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I think you vastly underestimate the willingness of the american electorate to embrace large scale changes that shift left. I think you vastly misunderstand the role of political parties and politics in general. I think you see the world as it is, and are unable to imagine it any other way. I think you're terrified of losing what little you have, and are unwilling to risk it for the chance for more. I don't mean this as a condemnation of you. I think most people are like you. But you don't belong in the Democratic party, or any other political party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I think you vastly misunderstand the role of political parties and politics in general. I think you see the world as it is, and are unable to imagine it any other way. I think you're terrified of losing what little you have, and are unwilling to risk it for the chance for more. Lmfao. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I think you vastly misunderstand the role of political parties and politics in general. I think you see the world as it is, and are unable to imagine it any other way. I think you're terrified of losing what little you have, and are unwilling to risk it for the chance for more. I don't think you really know me. I want a far-left liberal state that empowers and enriches its people. I want free, universal healthcare. Free, universal childcare. Basic income that would allow people to thrive. I see the world as it cold be, for sure. I also see that there are limits to how much can be achieved and that great change never happens without hard work and occasionally compromises along the way. So please kindly stop with this line of "if you're not full communism now, you're not part of the democratic party."
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Sure, of course those centrists also hold a lot of political and economic power especially in coastal cities especially in NYC/DC and the question is how do you actively combat them? A political civil war inside the Democratic Party could very well be extremely ugly...of course our current trajectory is about as bad. I think the party civil war is inevitable and necessary, but I think it's unlikely to be a bloodbath. Trump opposition has driven a lot of Democratic leaders to surprising levels of giving a poo poo. Obviously I wish Trump hadn't been elected, but the silver lining is the Democratic party starting to wake up a bit. I don't expect Pelosi to stop being a collaborationist, or Gabbard to stop being a racist, or Manchin to stop being a waste of flesh, but the majority of the party is moving in a direction I'm happy with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I think you spend way too much time shadowboxing a the vast centrist conspiracy to keep your leftist agenda down, tbh. Ah yes calling out someone for being a idiot now means I am a conspiracy theorist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Ah yes calling out someone for being a idiot now means I am a conspiracy theorist. You talk about CENTRISTS like they're some shadowy cabal dude. Like your posts are like noun, verb, and *spits* CENTRISTS
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I think the party civil war is inevitable and necessary, but I think it's unlikely to be a bloodbath. Trump opposition has driven a lot of Democratic leaders to surprising levels of giving a poo poo. Obviously I wish Trump hadn't been elected, but the silver lining is the Democratic party starting to wake up a bit. I don't expect Pelosi to stop being a collaborationist, or Gabbard to stop being a racist, or Manchin to stop being a waste of flesh, but the majority of the party is moving in a direction I'm happy with. To be honest, I think that is rather wishful thinking though at least on their broader trajectory. They are more actively challenging Trump that is true, especially since they have been absolutely backed into a corner but at the same time I really would have to see some pretty fundamental changes both in policy and how they present that policy. I could easily see the current Democratic Party continue to triple down on "building the middle class" and more or less minor tweaks to current policy. If there is a major break on the ACA that would actually be something, but they are at the moment more rigorously defending what is effectively the status quo. Also, centrists aren't necessarily a shadowy cabal but party politics in the US has largely confused definitions. In other countries they exist (the Lib Dems in the UK or MoDem/Macron in France) as independent entities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 18:59
|
|