|
Edible Hat posted:So, is installing Ellison a mere '"symbolic gesture" or will the Perez win lead to the permanent installation of corporate stooges in key positions of the Democratic Party's apparatus? Maybe you should move on, fight for leftist candidates in the primaries, and not believe that potential for a worldwide socialist revolution has collapsed because your preferred candidate is not in a "symbolic" role. Progress doesn't get made by giving up. Every single step of progress is made against opponents just as driven as you and probably more resourceful than you. We see it every time regressive policies get swept back in. But if you give up, progress doesn't get made. It is understandable why some people give up and go home. But if they're just done, then they can retire quietly instead of trying to drag down others with them. The fight against regressives needs to keep going on, whether it's small steps made by talking to friends and strangers and changing their minds, or big steps with leaders and policies.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:04 |
|
|
# ? Jun 13, 2024 06:34 |
|
WampaLord posted:The DNC chair isn't the top floor. No, that would be the presidential nomination.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:05 |
|
Edible Hat posted:I can speak for myself: I supported Ellison in this race and have followed his career since his House campaign in 2006 and I'm not pissed off. Additionally, I can't imagine any Ellison supporter caring about this beyond next week or beyond, to the 2018 midterm. (I can also mention the people who would have been pissed off if Ellison had won, like the ADF.) The progressive pundits (TYT, Kyle Kulinski, etc) are literally never going to stop bringing this election up as evidence that the DNC hates progressives. If you're sick of this debate now then boy howdy are you going to hate it popping up in every random US politics thread a year from now. See also: The primary debate
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:06 |
|
Condiv posted:it's the same thing bernie tried to do, cleaning up after the dems lovely choices. too bad it won't be enough this time Fulchrum posted:It's amazing how your definition of "like peers" actually means 'give us everything, don't even talk back, have absolutely no say and be blamed for everything bad ever." Your side has really lost the plot, you know? The left is both irrelevant electorally and responsible for Hillary's loss. Ellison and Perez would perform nearly identically as chairman, but it's Very Important that Perez win. Leftists don't get involved and deserve to be shut out of power, and when you block our candidates and undermine our positions we're just ineffectual whiners if we complain. Best of luck for 2018. You're really, really going to need it.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:06 |
|
JeffersonClay posted:Shorter Richard Nixon: why are the democrats so mad about me breaking into the watergate if the poo poo we stole wasn't true. ...you know money was stolen during that, right? So Deep Throat leaking the truth would've been bad news if he were paid by Russians to do it?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:07 |
|
Kilroy posted:Your side has really lost the plot, you know? The left is both irrelevant electorally and responsible for Hillary's loss. Ellison and Perez would perform nearly identically as chairman, but it's Very Important that Perez win. Leftists don't get involved and deserve to be shut out of power, and when you block our candidates and undermine our positions we're just ineffectual whiners if we complain. Not empty quoting.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:08 |
|
Argas posted:Progress doesn't get made by giving up. oh? someone needs to tell the dems that fast!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG7w3Oey3xs
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:08 |
|
readingatwork posted:Is it really so unreasonable to expect a party to at least pretend to care about you if they're going to demand your vote like it was their God damned birthright? If they won't even make symbolic gestures to people like me why should I make any effort to support them in turn? They don't care. The party thinks there are more important demographics to win right now than "dedicated leftists". That's the secret. The Democratic Party is more complicated than just "the left" and "the center". There are certainly important demographics that voted for Bernie that the Dems are worried about losing, but "leftists" aren't one of them. That's why they didn't bother to throw a bone to progressives.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:09 |
|
readingatwork posted:Is it really so unreasonable to expect a party to at least pretend to care about you if they're going to demand your vote like it was their God damned birthright? If they won't even make symbolic gestures to people like me why should I make any effort to support them in turn? No, not at all. I think it's a good thing to be vocal and agitate. Staying involved and constantly present is how you turn an enormous party operation like the DNC towards your preferred heading. All I'm saying is that it's a pretty clear admission that symbolism and identity are hugely motivating forces in politics to it can't be an error for Clinton to have played "identity politics", despite what the Sanders wing often argues; the problem is she played it poorly, not that she played it at all.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:11 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:They don't care. The party thinks there are more important demographics to win right now than "dedicated leftists". That's the secret. The Democratic Party is more complicated than just "the left" and "the center". There are certainly important demographics that voted for Bernie that the Dems are worried about losing, but "leftists" aren't one of them. That's why they didn't bother to throw a bone to progressives. Trump won by campaigning to literally the absolute fringe of his base despite being a Hollywood socialite. Bush barely won in 2000 by running as a compromiser, then won solidly by, again, appealing to the base. Going for your base works, so why are the Dems afraid of it.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:11 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:They don't care. The party thinks there are more important demographics to win right now than "dedicated leftists". That's the secret. The Democratic Party is more complicated than just "the left" and "the center". There are certainly important demographics that voted for Bernie that the Dems are worried about losing, but "leftists" aren't one of them. That's why they didn't bother to throw a bone to progressives. they always think there's more important demos to win. that's part of taking the left for granted forever. and it's part of why we need to demonstrate why they need to win us. that we're actually an important demographic too. and we do that by not showing up next time. just like how dems are suddenly concerned about rust-belt voters after they disappeared
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:11 |
|
Condiv posted:oh? someone needs to tell the dems that fast!! It's always amusing to hear people say they just want to be treated like peers and like adults, and then get absolutely outraged and pumped full of bile by someone doing exactly that.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:12 |
|
Probably Magic posted:Trump won by campaigning to literally the absolute fringe of his base despite being a Hollywood socialite. Bush barely won in 2000 by running as a compromiser, then won solidly by, again, appealing to the base. They think their base is only Clintonites/Third Way/New Dems/whatever the term is now.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:12 |
|
there is not a soul itt giving up the fight. just the realization of how utterly useless the democratic party, and the centrist maggots that swarm over its rotting corpse, will be in said fight
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:12 |
|
Wonder what the discussion would be like if Ellison had won
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:13 |
|
Foreploy posted:No, not at all. I think it's a good thing to be vocal and agitate. Staying involved and constantly present is how you turn an enormous party operation like the DNC towards your preferred heading. i agree, she played IDPol poorly. she used it as a wedge to seperate those more concerned with economic leftism and those more concerned with social leftism, and then ignored the needs of both camps. she could've at least given the social leftists a bone.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:13 |
|
Probably Magic posted:Trump won by campaigning to literally the absolute fringe of his base despite being a Hollywood socialite. Bush barely won in 2000 by running as a compromiser, then won solidly by, again, appealing to the base. And Romney and McCain were just so very liberal and trying to reach across the aisle?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:14 |
|
Emanuel Collective posted:close and gas this dumb thread
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:14 |
|
Some of you are obsessed with shutting down discussion. gently caress you, don't close the thread, if you don't like reading it then stop reading it.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:15 |
|
WampaLord posted:They think their base is only Clintonites/Third Way/New Dems/whatever the term is now. This is like the Republicans saying that Romney appealing to William F Buckley Republicans is a winning strategy, they just need to execute it with less foreign intervention from, I dunno, China. Fulchrum posted:And Romney and McCain were just so very liberal and trying to reach across the aisle? From a diehard Republican stance, extremely, yes? I mean, I know listening to Republican talking heads is painful to listen, it is for me too, but they regularly looked down on those two as RINOs.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:15 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:They don't care. The party thinks there are more important demographics to win right now than "dedicated leftists". That's the secret. The Democratic Party is more complicated than just "the left" and "the center". There are certainly important demographics that voted for Bernie that the Dems are worried about losing, but "leftists" aren't one of them. That's why they didn't bother to throw a bone to progressives. If that's the way they want to play it then fine I guess? However if they're really going to dump the left in favor of chasing Republican votes then they don't have the right to bitch and moan when the left dumps them in turn. Probably Magic posted:Trump won by campaigning to literally the absolute fringe of his base despite being a Hollywood socialite. Bush barely won in 2000 by running as a compromiser, then won solidly by, again, appealing to the base. Because progressives want to do things like end campaign contributions and regulate Wall Street. Leftists are literally a bigger threat to their agenda than the Republicans.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:16 |
|
Argas posted:Progress doesn't get made by giving up. Every single step of progress is made against opponents just as driven as you and probably more resourceful than you. We see it every time regressive policies get swept back in. But if you give up, progress doesn't get made. It is understandable why some people give up and go home. But if they're just done, then they can retire quietly instead of trying to drag down others with them. The fight against regressives needs to keep going on, whether it's small steps made by talking to friends and strangers and changing their minds, or big steps with leaders and policies. I don't disagree. That's why I'm saying that throwing up your hands and saying that organized leftism is done in America because Ellison lost is a destructive mindset.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:17 |
|
Edible Hat posted:I don't disagree. That's why I'm saying that throwing up your hands and saying that organized leftism is done in America because Ellison lost is a destructive mindset. No one is doing that, many of us are now realizing we can't rely on the Democratic party for help with our fight.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:17 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:They don't care. The party thinks there are more important demographics to win right now than "dedicated leftists". That's the secret. The Democratic Party is more complicated than just "the left" and "the center". There are certainly important demographics that voted for Bernie that the Dems are worried about losing, but "leftists" aren't one of them. That's why they didn't bother to throw a bone to progressives. Considering they gave Ellisson a loving position and "leftists" are acting like the DNC just executed him live on stage while cackling, I think the reason they aren't throwing them a bone is pretty clear.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:18 |
|
Edible Hat posted:I don't disagree. That's why I'm saying that throwing up your hands and saying that organized leftism is done in America because Ellison lost is a destructive mindset. organized leftism isn't done. the dems are
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:19 |
|
Just reading this: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-future-of-the-democratic-party-according-to-the-establishment/ It's not hard to understand the "gently caress Democrats" posts. quote:Cutter: So I don’t buy into we need to move left, we need to move right. We just need to be relevant to them, and there’s room in the party for all different types of specific policies. But we have to agree that we have to talk about things that matter to them. Good grief.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:19 |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Feingold also outspent Johnson. And Clinton wasn't spending any of her money in WI, either. Probably Magic posted:...you know money was stolen during that, right? While stealing money is bad, the real issue in the watergate scandal was stealing documents and bugging the phones-- illegally acquiring confidential information is archetypal ratfucking. Stop falling for it.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:19 |
|
Lightning Knight posted:And what was that "fake ideology?" At the core of her campaign were polling and analytics which served as this self contained feedback loop inside of a self contained anechoic chamber of false information which was then fed out to the public in snippets. Everything from her tweets to the amount of seconds she would spend on policy platforms. If you ask a Clinton supporter about how her lackluster economic policies, they’d probably point to some meaningless statistic about the amount of time she blurted out a robot speech that usually ended with “go to my website”, where you would get a bombarded with a list of policies (some contradicting) arranged in neatly in alphabetical order with no real central message or priority given to one over the other. She even copy/pasted her 2008 “Farmers for Hillary” campaign to attract rural voters as if she suspected they were none the wiser. Since her entire campaign, and thus her political message, were run on fake data, it is appropriate to call it a fake political ideology. Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Feb 26, 2017 |
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:20 |
|
Edible Hat posted:I don't disagree. That's why I'm saying that throwing up your hands and saying that organized leftism is done in America because Ellison lost is a destructive mindset. Oh my post was to agree with you.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:21 |
|
Probably Magic posted:This is like the Republicans saying that Romney appealing to William F Buckley Republicans is a winning strategy, they just need to execute it with less foreign intervention from, I dunno, China. They looked down on Bush as a Rino. They look down on every goddamn person who loses as a Rino cause they're bats hit insane and just rewrite reality to fit their agenda. The guy cursing anyone who thinks the government should exist to help anyone but the rich didn't win, therefore too liberal. The guy who picked Sarah loving Palin lost, therefore too liberal.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:21 |
|
I'm fairly sure the ideal Democratic base is the working poor and lower middle class blue collar types in urban areas, and that "progressives," which in our context means overwhelmingly younger and college educated people, aren't being factored in because we already don't vote in large numbers to begin with. The voters they shed in the Midwest aren't generally self-identified ideological progressives, and I think there's a huge blind spot on SA in assuming that we, I.e. College educated political nerds in their 20s-early 30s are "the base" when we are not, numerically. Which is to say "I'm taking my ball and going home" doesn't work for people like most of us in this thread because statistically people like us already overwhelmingly don't vote.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:21 |
|
readingatwork posted:If that's the way they want to play it then fine I guess? However if they're really going to dump the left in favor of chasing Republican votes then they don't have the right to bitch and moan when the left dumps them in turn. Fulchrum posted:Considering they gave Ellisson a loving position and "leftists" are acting like the DNC just executed him live on stage while cackling, I think the reason they aren't throwing them a bone is pretty clear.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:22 |
|
Confounding Factor posted:Cutter: So I don’t buy into we need to move left, we need to move right. We just need to be relevant to them, and there’s room in the party for all different types of specific policies. But we have to agree that we have to talk about things that matter to them. This is it, everyone. This is why the Dems will continue to fail.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:22 |
|
JeffersonClay posted:While stealing money is bad, the real issue in the watergate scandal was stealing documents and bugging the phones-- illegally acquiring confidential information is archetypal ratfucking. Stop falling for it. You're pressing that revealing things to the public, as opposed to hoarding information for party purposes, is the same. That's incredibly condescending to the American public, to assume that they can't sift through and decide for themselves which scandals matter or not. If Trump is actively involved in this, and he likely is, he should be punished for cooperating with Russians, sure. That's vastly different from the Democrat's call of "hacking the election," which assumes that the wikileaks had such a persuasive power that people were incapable of considering any other information. If that's the case, we're a failed state. And again... this is actual statements from the DNC. How come all responsibility belongs to those who leak it and not the ones who made it? Isn't that the kind of chilling effect that defined the Cold War?
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:23 |
|
readingatwork posted:If that's the way they want to play it then fine I guess? However if they're really going to dump the left in favor of chasing Republican votes then they don't have the right to bitch and moan when the left dumps them in turn. They're not bitching and moaning. They don't care. Leftists are a tiny group compared to racial minorities, the working class, and so on. Of course, leftists have many priorities in common with those groups...but their priorities aren't identical, which is why the Bernie endorsement (which matters a lot to leftists but not very much to minorities or workers) didn't play a significant role in the DNC chair election.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:24 |
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm fairly sure the ideal Democratic base is the working poor and lower middle class blue collar types in urban areas, and that "progressives," which in our context means overwhelmingly younger and college educated people, aren't being factored in because we already don't vote in large numbers to begin with. nope. even in my blood red state people were interested in sanders while hating clinton like poison. better healthcare, better minimum wage, etc. is really popular. had a discussion with a shuttle driver who worked at the same airport i used to work at when i was headed back to france, and he was your typical "they're all corrupt, gently caress them all" kind of guy. up until i mention bernie sanders at which point he had nothing but good things to say, and really wished he had been given a chance. Condiv fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Feb 26, 2017 |
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:24 |
Main Paineframe posted:They don't care. The party thinks there are more important demographics to win right now than "dedicated leftists". That's the secret. The Democratic Party is more complicated than just "the left" and "the center". There are certainly important demographics that voted for Bernie that the Dems are worried about losing, but "leftists" aren't one of them. That's why they didn't bother to throw a bone to progressives. They threw a bone, just a small one, deputy chair. And Perez is progressive, he just isn't Bernie's Chosen.
|
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:25 |
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:At the core of her campaign were polling and analytics which served as this self contained feedback loop inside of a self contained anechoic chamber of false information which was then fed out to the public in snippets. Everything from her tweets to the amount of seconds she would spend on policy platforms. If you ask a Clinton supporter about how her lackluster economic policies, they’d probably point to some meaningless statistic about the amount of time she blurted out a robot speech that usually ended with “go to my website”, where you would get a bombarded with a list of policies (some contradicting) arranged in neatly in alphabetical order with no real central message or priority given to one over the other. She even copy/pasted her 2008 “Farmers for Hillary” campaign to attract rural voters as if she suspected they were none the wiser. And this has precisely nothing to do with intersectionality and "political correctness." Hillary Clinton lost because she was a bad candidate running a bad campaign, not because of evil identity politics making leftists have to care about feminism and racism.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:25 |
|
WampaLord posted:No one is doing that, many of us are now realizing we can't rely on the Democratic party for help with our fight. Are you proposing a third party movement? In electoral terms, in a two-party system (a result of first-past-the-post voting), we kind of do have to rely on the Democrats. We can build grassroots support for leftists candidates in the primaries, but that still demonstrates the Democrats are the only game in town when it comes to putting people left-of-center in elected positions.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:27 |
|
|
# ? Jun 13, 2024 06:34 |
|
Lightning Knight posted:Which is to say "I'm taking my ball and going home" doesn't work for people like most of us in this thread because statistically people like us already overwhelmingly don't vote. Confounding Factor posted:Good grief.
|
# ? Feb 26, 2017 01:27 |