|
Quorum posted:Really? Because you haven't won conclusively and destroyed all of your foes in THREE MONTHS it's forever pointless? Reminder that being involved in your local party is how you alter the makeup of the DNC, it's not some nebulous body of party insiders who sit around smoking cigars made of money (or, rather, if it is, it's because that's who's been involved in local party politics up until now). They're elected up through the levels of party committees, and dropping out of involvement with the local ones is exactly 100% how you ensure that what you predict is correct. That's a feature, not a bug. If you sit on the sidelines and never get involved, the party not reflecting 100% of what you think is now an excuse for your continued non action. If you all are really this distraught over it, go work with your local party and get yourself in. Congrats, you now have an ability to affect change. If you aren't willing to do that then shut the gently caress up about how the party betrayed you and Ellison as vice chair instead of chair is going to usher in a thousand years of darkness. It makes you look like an idiot.
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:45 |
|
|
Condiv posted:yes he was. why was he giving banks legal blowjobs instead of holding them to account for their crimes if he wasn't a sockpuppet back then. how dare the civil rights division focus on police brutality and voter suppression, why that makes me so mad!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Thankfully the people threatening to give up and never support the democrats again because they didn't get what they wanted don't have a presidential election to gently caress up in four months this time. They are just at a loss currently without a thread devoted to their WW3 and clinton foundation conspiracies or their belief that it was actually a typo all along and 6.5 not 65 million people voted for the sinking ship Democratic Party
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:Do kids like sucking wall street dick and bending over for fascists? Im sure they do, so perez will be a huge hit with the younger crowd The Democrats have literally no qualified people to run in 2020 against Trump at the moment, other than HRC. What a coincidence~ rscott posted:How was Keith Ellison gonna do it and how is that different from what Perez is going for do? Because this entire DNC chair run was a pretty good litmus test on how entrenched the Democrats are in their failed ideology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:Shh. You might have missed the memo that Perez is now a neoliberal shill for the corporatists because Bernie didn't endorse him. the fact that the only reason he was put up for election was big-money donors being worried Ellison was going to win doesn't help his cause on that one, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
axeil posted:That's a feature, not a bug. If you sit on the sidelines and never get involved, the party not reflecting 100% of what you think is now an excuse for your continued non action. Yeah, ultimately anyone who would storm out because of this thing of all things is just looking for an excuse. Maybe if it'd gone differently they'd have stopped looking for one, and I think it'd have been worth a try, but who knows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:Shh. You might have missed the memo that Perez is now a neoliberal shill for the corporatists because Bernie didn't endorse him. Perez endorsed Hillary in the primaries. Warren at least kept her mouth shut. You guys are sure doing a good job winning over the progressive wing of the party, btw
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:how dare the civil rights division focus on police brutality and voter suppression, why that makes me so mad!!! cept he was on a case where they gave slap on the wrist fines to banks that foreclosed on active duty service members? some service members even killed themselves. but that's not really important to punish as a member of the DoJ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:
Is there a super rolleyes emote where a giant rolleyes smilies vomits out a million more smaller rolleyes smilies
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:how dare the civil rights division focus on police brutality and voter suppression, why that makes me so mad!!! Or more accurately "how dare someone let their bosses do something instead of self immolating for no real change". It's so loving telling that's what people are grasping to...Because only someone who has never been in a position with something to lose would suggest a bargain that idiotic. Torch your career for objecting to something that you have no ability to change and/or so you can slap people with misdemeanor charges that probably won't be followed through on. Wow. What a great thing to sacrifice yourself for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Condiv posted:no, because waging a civil war is probably going to take longer than till 2018. and by 2018 we'll be written out of existence by republicans. You still haven't justified why you think that ceasing any attempt to change the party through local action is the moral option. Also, please let me know where you're planning the first military action of the new Civil War, I assume you're organizing it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Maybe you guys will do a better job with rustbelt voters you must absolutely win over in 2020
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:The Democrats have literally no qualified people to run in 2020 against Trump at the moment, other than HRC. What a coincidence~ Yeah and a Trump presidency was seen as a impossibility 4 years ago, what's your point
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
I'm not super happy about Perez, but there isn't a single reason that comes from Perez himself. It's more that I don't like that the DNC couldn't even throw a bone to the Sanderista wing of the party and support unity. We need to be honest about this part: Perez is the one who chose Ellison the way he did, and from all the dinner meeting stuff, it sounds like it's something two old friends worked out so that they could stay the course both of them want to take. It's probably not something the old guard told Perez to do. That being said, keep a close eye on what Perez does and publicly support things he does that you like, because if you box him in with what you see as the center-right old guard puppetmaster illuminati, he will have no choice but to become that. If you think he's a good candidate with bad support, then become the better support so he can become the good chairman he could be. If you believe Perez is a corporate clintonista cuck or w/e then there's not much that can be said to you, because you don't subscribe to reality.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
rscott posted:How was Keith Ellison gonna do it and how is that different from what Perez is going for do? that's not the POINT you IDIOT Since the two of them are so similar then why not just give the chair to Keith and piss nobody off, instead of giving it to Perez and pissing off an important part of the base? Why couldn't they even do that much? Because they're idiot losers and they suck, that's why. Have fun voting for HRC in 2020 again or whoever the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:Yeah and a Trump presidency was seen as a impossibility 4 years ago, what's your point Don’t run the same campaign you did back in 2016 or do what the DNC did during the Obama years jesus christ the Democrats are hopeless
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:The Democrats have literally no qualified people to run in 2020 against Trump at the moment, other than HRC. What a coincidence~ I too remeber front runner 2004 presidential candidate Al Gore. Man his second run really did suck. Oh wait.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Quorum posted:You still haven't justified why you think that ceasing any attempt to change the party through local action is the moral option. Also, please let me know where you're planning the first military action of the new Civil War, I assume you're organizing it? how is it immoral? i think my time is better spent working for other parties now and convincing other dems to abandon the dem party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yes he was. why was he giving banks legal blowjobs instead of holding them to account for their crimes if he wasn't a sockpuppet back then. FYI you probably want to cite his work at Justice rather than as Secretary for that, his only legal blowjob to banks in Labor was the waiver stuff which frankly strikes me as a fairly reasonable decision. At Justice, he A) went after banks with a fairly uncommonly used law, but B) decided against jailing people for illegal foreclosures under that statute, instead sticking with fines and remuneration. Personally I'd call it a wash at worst - it does demonstrate that he was willing to push prosecution of the banks as institutions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Queering Wheel posted:that's not the POINT you IDIOT ... wait. Your argument is literally "it doesn't matter so why not do what i want??"
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Maybe you guys will do a better job with rustbelt voters you must absolutely win over in 2020 So are you joining team Vote-For-Trump or team Stay-Home-For-Trump?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Queering Wheel posted:that's not the POINT you IDIOT Because maybe they liked the idea of putting someone in charge who was better at combating voter supression or had more experience fixing broken institutions? Not everything is a conspiracy or done solely for ~*optics*~. While Ellison and Perez generally agreed on strategies they both have very different toolsets for accomplishing those goals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Queering Wheel posted:that's not the POINT you IDIOT I thought you guys were all about voting, not about giving elections to people?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Predicting how the democrats will do in 4 years is pointless, far too much can change in even a year
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:I'm not super happy about Perez, but there isn't a single reason that comes from Perez himself. It's more that I don't like that the DNC couldn't even throw a bone to the Sanderista wing of the party and support unity. We need to be honest about this part: Perez is the one who chose Ellison the way he did, and from all the dinner meeting stuff, it sounds like it's something two old friends worked out so that they could stay the course both of them want to take. It's probably not something the old guard told Perez to do. Yeah. Perez has a lot on his shoulders now and it's all his responsibility. Skepticism is great, but writing a person unequivocally better than DWS or Howard Dean off before they've even done any work as DNC chair says a lot more about your own intentions walking in than it does for Perez or the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So are you joining team Vote-For-Trump or team Stay-Home-For-Trump? I’m not banking on a failed investment Hillary couldn’t win with hundreds and millions of dollars in advantage and all the intersectional pseudo-ideological bullshit at her back
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:the fact that the only reason he was put up for election was big-money donors being worried Ellison was going to win doesn't help his cause on that one, tbh. On the plus side if the big money donors' most conservative viable option was Tom Perez that's a wonderful sign.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:... wait. Your argument is literally "it doesn't matter so why not do what i want??" If it does not matter, why was Perez put up by the establishment to fight Ellison so late in the game? It's a pretty simple thing: the democratic establishment refuses to admit the possibility of changing, despite losing everything it is possible to lose over the last eight years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Condiv posted:how is it immoral? i think my time is better spent working for other parties now and convincing other dems to abandon the dem party. Cool. I'm sure you're gonna do that. Yep. Definitely. Totally not just internet tough guy posting. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Condiv posted:how is it immoral? i think my time is better spent working for other parties now and convincing other dems to abandon the dem party. Okay, genuine question. What do you think the best possible outcome of this is. Like the absolute best possible outcome? Ze Pollack posted:If it does not matter, why was Perez put up by the establishment to fight Ellison so late in the game? There is a difference between the two. The difference is not the gigantic wide gulf you're making it out to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:FYI you probably want to cite his work at Justice rather than as Secretary for that, his only legal blowjob to banks in Labor was the waiver stuff which frankly strikes me as a fairly reasonable decision. the waiver wasn't reasonable, no. also, how long has "fines and remuneration (  )" been tried, and bankers just keep violating the law? at this point, fines and remuneration below what the banks made committing crime is exactly a blowjob to the banks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:I’m not banking on a failed investment So are you going to toxx for that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:45
|
|
ImpAtom posted:... wait. Your argument is literally "it doesn't matter so why not do what i want??" TBF the argument in this thread from the Clintonistas was "This doesn't even matter, why do you care?" so this is the logical answer to that argument. The real answer is it does matter who the DNC chair is, but that also doesn't help Perez look good when he was sort of hastily shoved into the running a month after Ellison was already bringing together both the left and center parts of the party to support him. No matter how you look at it, it really does look very shady, and a lot like what we saw the DNC doing under DWS for Clinton.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
The DNC establishment exists to protect the interests of its monied constituency. Ellison was put forward and supported largely by factors outside of this core constituency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
To the people unhappy, if Ellison had won and named Perez deputy chair, would you be happy? Or would be upset that he gave a bone to those dang neoliberalism and now they'll triangulate all the leverage away? It's like they tried to go for an "everybody wins" storyline but the people who were caught up in the race for months can't buy into it. Maybe we can run Stone Cold Steve Austin out there to deliver a stunner to both guys and ensure everyone's happy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Okay, genuine question. What do you think the best possible outcome of this is. Like the absolute best possible outcome? dems loving die, get replaced by a party that actually represents its voters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:I’m not banking on a failed investment So are you going to vote Republican, vote for the Greens or stay home in 2018?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Condiv posted:how is it immoral? i think my time is better spent working for other parties now and convincing other dems to abandon the dem party. Lol the trump supporter reveals himself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:TBF the argument in this thread from the Clintonistas was "This doesn't even matter, why do you care?" so this is the logical answer to that argument. A lot of neoliberal shills here and elsewhere liked to squawk about "optics" and poo poo during the primaries and general election, and yet they seem like the least aware group on how to not look incredibly guilty and assholish.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:45 |
|
|
Condiv posted:dems loving die, get replaced by a party that actually represents its voters. So, Condiv, if literally everyone left the Democratic party and joined a new party, how would it be different from the Democratic Party as it exists now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 22:47
|
|