|
Will Perez force the dems left? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
33 | 6.38% |
| No |
|
343 | 66.34% |
| Keith Ellison |
|
54 | 10.44% |
| Pete Buttigieg |
|
71 | 13.73% |
| Jehmu Green |
|
16 | 3.09% |
| Total: | 416 votes | ||
|
JeffersonClay posted:
I'm really glad you keep doubling down on using that as an insult. How very tolerant of you.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
KomradeX posted:I'm really glad you keep doubling down on using that as an insult. How very tolerant of you. Huh, I don't see how you could see that as insulting unless you believed it was possible to imply things, which doesn't seem to be true since y'all keep insisting that devaluing racism as a factor in American society isn't treating it as unimportant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I live in the Rust Belt, motherfucker, Remember when you were saying I was the one getting all huffy?  quote:and I have never seen these people in the wild. I have seen far more people who blame particular governors, who blame Reagan, who blame the Japanese, who blame NAFTA, but putting the blame on William Jefferson Clinton? That, my friend, I do not see. Who are these people you have such intimate contacts with in Automation Alley, who blame the devil Clinton? I get the feeling that you don't really listen that carefully to the people you claim to be surrounded by. JeffersonClay posted:Had Romney and McCain made the same overt appeals to racial resentment as Trump that argument would be a lot stronger. I think those may have been offset by the fact that Barack Obama was (and remains!) a black dude with a non-Western name. Brainiac Five posted:Huh, I don't see how you could see that as insulting You meant it as an insult, you silly. Don't lie! Majorian fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Huh, I don't see how you could see that as insulting unless you believed it was possible to imply things, which doesn't seem to be true since y'all keep insisting that devaluing racism as a factor in American society isn't treating it as unimportant. It's disparaging to call people you disagree with as having a learning disability. It's like calling stuff you think is stupid "gay." It's gross to do and is not indicative of someone who embraces a tolerant ideology
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:What I mean is, what should the Democratic Party be doing in terms of promoting anti-racist policy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Remember when you were saying I was the one getting all huffy? Well, kiddo, I guess mommy never hit you enough for you to think condescension is a viable conversational gambit. That doesn't support anything of what you are claiming. Not a bit. The only mention of Slick Willie is a note that a Reagan Dem voted for him once. Funnily enough, Macomb County is $10k higher on median incomes than Detroit, but I guess it's a real halcyon of the working class. I also guess economic anxiety is why Macomb County voters destroyed the RTA.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:For the third time, I don't think democrats should abandon pluralism. More importantly, discussing the existence of racism as a real and important component of our society does not make one a lesser ally to POC. Denying the existence of racism, insisting we can't talk about it, or insisting we have to pretend it doesn't exist when we think about our strategy does make you a lesser ally to POC, however. you're not discussing anything of the sort though, just saying "hillary lost cause america is racist" and "this policy (expanding the welfare state) won't fly because of racists" as if any of the democrats' political "wisdom" was still valid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:It's disparaging to call people you disagree with as having a learning disability. It's like calling stuff you think is stupid "gay." It's gross to do and is not indicative of someone who embraces a tolerant ideology Whoosh! The post went straight over your head! Kilroy posted:Why don't you go first: what is a good way to sell e.g. affirmative action? Assume that the people you're trying to sell it to aren't explicitly racist, but they're not going to intuitively understand institutional racism or they think it's when the person behind the counter at the DMV is mean to you because of your skin color or something. To me that sort of thing is a harder sell even than stuff that is more draconian on the face of it (like compared to federal investigations of police departments for example), because it's to combat something that certainly most whites have no experience of and many think probably doesn't exist or is overblown. Everybody can at least agree that cops shoot a lot of black people even if they think they all deserved it - I think in a way it's harder to illustrate the 1000s of "small" things that add up to a huge problem and the cause behind adverse outcomes, and craft a case for affirmative action off the back of that. That certainly doesn't mean I think we shouldn't try, and I think we need to be honest in explaining the need for it even if it's a harder sell, and yes where necessary we need to push for that stuff even when it's contrary to what the public supports. "I want to hear what you guys think." "You first!" WTF.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
KwegiboHB posted:Could you link me to that, or what page number was it? I'd like to read that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:It's disparaging to call people you disagree with as having a learning disability. It's like calling stuff you think is stupid "gay." It's gross to do and is not indicative of someone who embraces a tolerant ideology It's not disparaging to ask people if their persistent inability to read for comprehension is the result of a learning disability, because that's an actual learning disability. It's analogous to asking someone who can't see or hear something everyone else can see or hear if they're blind or deaf. It's crass at worst. Majorian posted:I think those may have been offset by the fact that Barack Obama was (and remains!) a black dude with a non-Western name. So we're back to people can't be racist if they voted for Obama?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:"I want to hear what you guys think." I did tell you what I think, to the best of my ability. Obviously I don't know what you're getting at when you say "anti-racist" because that's three posts where I've tried and your response has been "well actually what I'm asking for is X." So when I ask you want you think, I'm trying to get an example out of you. I don't know what you want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Whoosh! The post went straight over your head! I don't think you understand what that means from the way you've been posting. The fact remains using disability as an insult makes you rear end in a top hat. Funny how you want to call everyone else a racist but oddly slient on JC wanting to jettison the few things the Democrats keep to promote a plural society. It's almost like you really don't care about it, and are just using this issue to attack people you disagree with. JeffersonClay posted:It's not disparaging to ask people if their persistent inability to read for comprehension is the result of a learning disability, because that's an actual learning disability. It's analogous to asking someone who can't see or hear something everyone else can see or hear if they're blind or deaf. It's crass at worst. There you go again with it. Now this is just a maybe, but maybe everyone else's ability to read isn't the problem and it's you that there is something wrong with. KomradeX fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Like I said, caustic as hell. But, like, you're not offering any positive policy proposals beyond "prosecute police officers". I would rather you present how anti-racist efforts should be done first so that we have a base to start from. KomradeX posted:I don't think you understand what that means from the way you've been posting. I am "remaining silent" because he's not saying that at all, and your attempts to say that he is suggest that you're either extremely stupid or desperately wanting to attack him. You straight up did not get that I was calling you a hypocrite because you're relying on JeffersonClay implying something nasty in order for his statements to be insulting, but y'all refuse to recognize implications when your guys engage in them. You are a loving moron. Brainiac Five fucked around with this message at 02:49 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So we're back to people can't be racist if they voted for Obama? are you really trying to argue obama didn't have it as bad wrt racism as hillary's campaign did? cause 2008 had people repeating obama's name all the time to associate him with an evil iraqi we just got done killing and he still pulled out a win
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
I'm still highly puzzled at this weird implication that courting racists is a change of plans considering that this is the same democratic party that was planning to make up for its loss in the rust belt by trying to appeal to white flight suburban republicans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:it was a different thread: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3812470&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=2#post470049055 You claimed I said that giving leftists a voice in the party will lead to electoral defeats. And then you found a bunch of quotes where I said I didn't think that moving to the left on policy would necessarily make it easier to win. And because you are really dumb, or really bad at reading, you thought that proved your point. Condiv posted:you're not discussing anything of the sort though, just saying "hillary lost cause america is racist" and "this policy (expanding the welfare state) won't fly because of racists" as if any of the democrats' political "wisdom" was still valid. You cannot read for poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:I'm still highly puzzled at this weird implication that courting racists is a change of plans considering that this is the same democratic party that was planning to make up for its loss in the rust belt by trying to appeal to white flight suburban republicans. So what should be done with Chuck Schumer, then, for him saying that? Should he be drawn and quartered on live teevee, guillotined, shot in the back of the neck in a basement somewhere?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Well, kiddo, I guess mommy never hit you enough for you to think condescension is a viable conversational gambit.  quote:That doesn't support anything of what you are claiming. Not a bit. The only mention of Slick Willie is a note that a Reagan Dem voted for him once. It actually does; throughout the article, it refers to the policies of the 90's, and the Democrats' inability to convince those voters that they do care about their economic prospects. Here's another good article. Money quote: quote:The votes that switched were in the Rust Belt. Depressed Democratic turnout did matter, but this wasn’t indifference or apathy alone. It was also because Clinton was a terrible candidate for the Rust Belt, a region with a lot of people who were particularly likely to remember Bill Clinton’s move to free trade and abandonment of manufacturing as well as Hillary Clinton’s advocacy for TPP and defense of Wall Street. This piece also has a good section on Macomb County: quote:Take Macomb County and Oakland County in Michigan. Macomb County is mostly white and has a median household income of around $53,000. It is not particularly poor, but also not affluent. It is often characterized as “working class” and “socially conservative.” Majorian fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:
Except he is, what with his support of racist polices towards refugees makes me think the two of you are disingenuous
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:I don't think you understand what that means from the way you've been posting. Yes, I am only bringing up racism to score political points but this tirade in defense of people with reading comprehension problems is motivated by the purest intentions.  quote:There you go again with it. Now this is just a maybe, but maybe everyone else's ability to read isn't the problem and it's you that there is something wrong with. There are plenty of posters who do not have this persistent difficulty it's really weird!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So we're back to people can't be racist if they voted for Obama? Mmmm, nope, because that's not a claim that I ever made. My argument is that race may have played a role, but it does not seem to be the fulcrum issue for these voters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So what should be done with Chuck Schumer, then, for him saying that? Should he be drawn and quartered on live teevee, guillotined, shot in the back of the neck in a basement somewhere? Are you Chuck Schumer's account or something? Also yes, implying that congressmen who do stupid poo poo should not have the same job security as members of the supreme soviet is the same as wanting them tortured in public.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
The article you actually linked at first linked it to the policies of the 80s. Now you're linking an article that doesn't offer any evidence and was obviously written by some schmuck who knows gently caress-all about Michigan politics and culture. Macomb County voters are hugely racist, having, as I alluded, shut down major infrastructure projects because they would allow black people to use them. Saying that it's primarily "economic anxiety" is plain bullshit. KomradeX posted:Except he is, what with his support of racist polices towards refugees makes me think the two of you are disingenuous Oh wow, you think that. drat. I have alienated someone so stupid that when they die the entire world will be noticeably smarter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:Are you Chuck Schumer's account or something? It's an actual honest question. Y'all seem to want people to stay in office forever so that you can talk about the things they said one time, instead of doing anything active. It's baffling! You didn't even mention the possibility of getting rid of him until I engaged in a little gratuitous sadism!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Mmmm, nope, because that's not a claim that I ever made. My argument is that race may have played a role, but it does not seem to be the fulcrum issue for these voters. And the only evidence to support that view is their previous support for Obama in elections where republicans were not making the same explicit appeals to racism. Racism isn't just black=bad. Plenty of people who claim to be, and may believe themselves to be, colorblind in fact harbor significant racial animosity. JeffersonClay fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It's an actual honest question. Even if you're either a liar or a moron for saying that I will briefly entertain the notion: primary the spineless gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
It's funny, because you'd want to track their positions over more than just 2012-2016, in order for the proposition to be really compelling. How many of them voted for Bush in 2004, for example?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It's funny, because you'd want to track their positions over more than just 2012-2016, in order for the proposition to be really compelling. How many of them voted for Bush in 2004, for example? "How many of them voted Bush" is going to include quite a few woke liberals who went Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:Even if you're either a liar or a moron for saying that I will briefly entertain the notion: primary the spineless gently caress. Okay. So why are we supposed to hyperventilate about that again? Please excuse me, I have a condition that makes it hard for me to keep up with the dizzying spirals of Bernie Sanders Thought. Agnosticnixie posted:"How many of them voted Bush" is going to include quite a few woke liberals who went Clinton. So go kill them, or something. I don't understand what all these childish gibes are meant to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The article you actually linked at first linked it to the policies of the 80s. I don't think you read more than a couple lines from the article. Let me help you: quote:Trump promised to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was signed by Bill Clinton in 1993 over the objection of organized labor and has since been blamed for the loss of manufacturing jobs to Third World countries with lower wage and labor standards. Nowhere is that a sorer point than in Flint. In 1980, GM employed 80,000 in the Flint area; today, it employs 7,200. Flint’s decline began a decade before NAFTA, but the trade deal was seen as just another kick at the auto industry. In 1999, GM closed Buick City, a Flint assembly plant that once provided a living to 28,000 workers. Since its demolition, the site has gone the way of all Flint, with poplars and yarrow pushing through cracks in the asphalt. quote:Now you're linking an article that doesn't offer any evidence and was obviously written by some schmuck who knows gently caress-all about Michigan politics and culture. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I don't think you read more than a couple lines from the article. Let me help you: I admire how you cut out most of my post so that you could post an emoticon and temporarily fill the void where your soul would normally be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Romney certainly argued that electing him would improve the economy, and with many, but not all, of the same arguments Trump made. Cut taxes on "job creators", repeal regulations, have an experienced businessman in charge. Most voters do not vote based upon a rational evaluation of a candidate's policies. Trump was widely perceived as being outside the establishment (and thus more likely to "shake things up") while Romney was pretty much the face of establishment Republicans. It doesn't matter if the policies themselves were mostly the same. In the same way, there are many things aside from her specific policies that drove some people away from voting for Clinton (anything ranging from misogyny to her perception as "establishment", etc). Even though her policies were to the left of Obama, a combination of her history and personality lead to a perception that she was more "establishment" and would not be a reliable advocate for left-wing causes. I feel like you keep trying to simplify this stuff to a model where some interaction between voters' political views and a politicians' policies yields a particular result, but that is not sufficient to accurately represent what drives voter behavior.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Most voters do not vote based upon a rational evaluation of a candidate's policies. Trump was widely perceived as being outside the establishment (and thus more likely to "shake things up") while Romney was pretty much the face of establishment Republicans. It doesn't matter if the policies themselves were mostly the same. I feel like these posts are just an elaborate way to assume Americans are all idiots so we don't have to worry about thinking about anything. To be quite frank.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:I'm really glad you keep doubling down on using that as an insult. How very tolerant of you. Yea well, I'm from the rust belt, MOTHERFUCKER
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Yea well, I'm from the rust belt, MOTHERFUCKER Huh, so you're unable to figure out that there are two different people daring to exist without your consent. My "you guys all share one brain" insult is proving frighteningly accurate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:And the only evidence to support that view is their previous support for Obama in elections where republicans were not making the same explicit appeals to racism. I'm not seeing much evidence to support your hypothesis that these voters, who voted D in every election since Reagan '84, were poached into the Trump camp because he was more racist than previous Republican candidates. Bush Sr., Dole, Bush Jr., McCain, and Romney may not have been as explicitly racist in their appeals as Trump, but they still appealed to racism and racial resentment. Trump didn't just invent that out of thin air. So the notion that it was just upping the racist ante that dislodged them doesn't have much support in terms of evidence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
I honestly really enjoy the implicit insistence that we have to bring manufacturing jobs back, because no one will actually defend it if you brought out what it would entail. All that would be on offer is some poo poo that involves willpower
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I honestly really enjoy the implicit insistence that we have to bring manufacturing jobs back Lefties aren't insisting that at all. We're all perfectly cognizant of the fact that those jobs aren't coming back. That's part of why it's so important to re-strengthen social welfare programs in the region, and invest heavily in trade adjustment programs to revitalize these communities. Bill Clinton didn't have a very good record here, and Obama's record was mixed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Lefties aren't insisting that at all. We're all perfectly cognizant of the fact that those jobs aren't coming back. That's part of why it's so important to re-strengthen social welfare programs in the region, and invest heavily in trade adjustment programs to revitalize these communities. Bill Clinton didn't have a very good record here, and Obama's record was mixed. Ah, the hive mind reveals itself at last. Or were you talking about yourself and furiously hoping people would accept that generalization so that when one of the brain trust makes another spittle-flecked post about purging bloggers they'd interpret it positively?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Ah, the hive mind reveals itself at last. Or were you talking about yourself and furiously hoping people would accept that generalization so that when one of the brain trust makes another spittle-flecked post about purging bloggers they'd interpret it positively? I can only speak for my own views, but I also know a blatant strawman when I see one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 03:25
|
|