|
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 | ||
|
Fulchrum posted:No I wasn't, I was presenting it as his opinion, and that people were pretending that Ellison was like any other Muslim, not an individual.  "Like any other Muslim"? And what, pray tell, does that mean, Fulchrum?  e: \/\/\/noted Civil Rights Act opponent Barry Goldwater, at that\/\/\/ Majorian fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Apr 4, 2017 |
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Muslims are a religion, not a race  Still curious about what 'concerns' we should have about young Hillary Clinton's endorsement of the Goldwater campaign. I'm just asking questions here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
I'm pretty pleased with how tight Ellison and Perez are and how they're working together moving forwards. Like, Perez could've totally blown off Ellison and destroyed the party, but he's not a W-level idiot....guys, am I centrist or worse, a librul now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:These Obama circle Democrats are so dumb, arrogant and overconfident that they actually give interviews before and after the DNC election where they say "yeah our explicit goal was to prevent the Sanders wing from getting power" and then you want to be outraged that people don't believe that they had other reasons for not wanting Ellison, reasons which just happen to not make any sense at all. Speaking as a vile self-identified Obama Democrat, this and your previous post are well-considered and positive contributions even if I don't necessarily agree with your implied conclusions (and, er, need to catch up on the thread). 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
stone cold posted:I'm pretty pleased with how tight Ellison and Perez are and how they're working together moving forwards. Like, Perez could've totally blown off Ellison and destroyed the party, but he's not a W-level idiot....guys, am I centrist or worse, a librul now? You're an optimist, which is the worst thing of all.  (but so am I)
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:Or, may I offer, that Alan Dershowitz has lovely, evil opinions and that is bad, regardless of whether he honestly believes them or they are politically motivated lies plus he's a loving trump collaborator that is indulging in racism happily
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I remember hearing a lot of this kind of "concern" directed towards Hillary during both the primary and the campaign. unlikely. people were quite open about disliking her, and quite open about in what ways they disliked her. i for one made it quite clear throughout the election why i didn't like her
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
stone cold posted:I'm pretty pleased with how tight Ellison and Perez are and how they're working together moving forwards. Like, Perez could've totally blown off Ellison and destroyed the party, but he's not a W-level idiot....guys, am I centrist or worse, a librul now? I agree with you. So yes, you're both. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
loquacius posted:On the contrary, you were absolutely trying to present his viewpoint as representative of Jewish people before I stepped in and complicated the issue, yw please note that jewish person bernie sander's opinion doesn't matter at all. most likely cause bernie is racist against himself
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
stone cold posted:I'm pretty pleased with how tight Ellison and Perez are and how they're working together moving forwards. Like, Perez could've totally blown off Ellison and destroyed the party, but he's not a W-level idiot....guys, am I centrist or worse, a librul now? worse, you're stone cold  edit: since we had a long tweet thread earlier in the thread about hypothetical racists being unreachable, lets have a twitter thread about a gay PoC being unreachable by hillary and fans https://twitter.com/disco_socialist/status/848904109906288641?ref_src=tw
Condiv fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
Condiv posted:unlikely. people were quite open about disliking her, and quite open about in what ways they disliked her. i for one made it quite clear throughout the election why i didn't like her I'm glad you were open. I had Goldwater and Byrd thrown at me as evidence for disliking Hillary on multiple occasions...
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I'm glad you were open. I had Goldwater and Byrd thrown at me as evidence for disliking Hillary on multiple occasions... the first thing that turned me from unenthused to actually loathing her is when she sent her daughter out to lie about bernie and pretend he wanted to deprive people of healthcare her making GBS threads all over singlepayer while not offering any worthwhile alternative was the second
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
Condiv posted:worse, you're stone cold These people are there right kind of racists tho, because they have money and the right skin color. Only rural racists are the targe of our rage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:That we have one side making GBS threads on the minority status of Perez (who has also done a ton of civil rights work) because he's part of the wrong team, while the other side reiterates obviously unfair smears against Ellison because he's part of the wrong team, isn't really convincing me that we're seeing good faith arguments about the value of minority representation Pointing out that racism often manifests as a preference for the lighter skinned minority is not making GBS threads on Perez's minority status. Bigotry is not mono-dimensional, and this is an actual problem even in many supposedly "diverse" organizations. Black people face more discrimination the blacker they are, and it's a genuine problem. Of course, the main piece of bigotry used against Ellison seemed more concerned with him being Muslim than with him being black... it mostly comes across as some members of the DNC apparently genuinely feeling he was specifically the "unacceptable" type of minority (concerned about a muslim heading the party committee) and others who saw that as an opportunity to attack him with racist bullshit (Fulchrum), which is kind of messed up. But the original contention was that racists couldn't have preferred Perez over Ellison because Perez was also a minority, which is laughably stupid, and proposing they might see him as whiter is not a particularly messed up argument considering historically that lighter-skinned preference is a big loving challenge darker-skinned black people face even (and even especially) among populations with high minority representation. I also doubt any of it impacted the result - the sort of people who eschew personal racism while actively promoting systemic racism tend to be committed centrists. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Pointing out that racism often manifests as a preference for the lighter skinned minority is not making GBS threads on Perez's minority status. Bigotry is not mono-dimensional, and this is an actual problem even in many supposedly "diverse" organizations. Black people face more discrimination the blacker they are, and it's a genuine problem. Of course, the main piece of bigotry used against Ellison seemed more concerned with him being Muslim than with him being black... it mostly comes across as some members of the DNC apparently genuinely feeling he was specifically the "unacceptable" type of minority (concerned about a muslim heading the party committee) and others who saw that as an opportunity to attack him with racist bullshit (Fulchrum), which is kind of messed up. Yes okay I am aware of this (and it is part of why I identify as white despite being mixed) but that conversation still really rubbed me the wrong way, because what people were really trying to do is poo poo on the establishment, not make good faith points about racism in the party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:12
|
|
|
New thread title: "Will the Democrats ever stop punching left?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
Condiv posted:the first thing that turned me from unenthused to actually loathing her is when she sent her daughter out to lie about bernie and pretend he wanted to deprive people of healthcare Let me defend Chelsea's comments here because they are important going forward, both politically and policy wise: It's bad politics because you're proposing to take away a benefit enjoyed (72-19!!!) by the most democratically-active cohort and replace it with "something else" and it's gonna be a loving uphill slog explaining to these people why this is a good thing. It's bad policy because Bernie proposed a system wherein each state operates their own program, and it's not like we just went through six years of Republicans going out of their way to hurt their own constituents to try to sabotage a health coverage initiative. Meanwhile, Clinton was pushing a subsidized insurance exchange backstopped by a public option, which, incidentally, is also how I'd describe Medicare. I mean literal Medicare For All is a better plan than "Medicare For All" which is "for all" but not "Medicare".
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:What's Euro-bred mean here Don't be coy. Perez has clear European ancestry. There's a clear difference in perception between someone like Perez (light skinned, predominantly European ancestry, upper class) and someone like Raul Grijalva (working class, dark skinned, mestizo and Indian ancestry). Being PC is fine, but we can't afford to be color blind if we want to tackle bad cultural and racial norms. That said, I'm glad Latinos are being represented. I just wish he wasn't a Clintonite. BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:Yes okay I am aware of this (and it is part of why I identify as white despite being mixed) but that conversation still really rubbed me the wrong way, because what people were really trying to do is poo poo on the establishment, not make good faith points about racism in the party. Looks like you're just projecting. You can both dislike the establishment and dislike racial norms. Condiv said Perez was "whiter" and I could sense that people were gonna interpret that as racism. As a light skinned Mexican, I've experienced first-hand what it's like to have privilege in some circles, and be a token minority in others. It's not unfair to say that Perez is the "whiter" more palatable choice over Ellison. I also have no qualms about saying that Dems prefer upper class minorities to working class minorities. Compare the treatment Obama got to the treatment Jesse Jackson got.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:Yes okay I am aware of this (and it is part of why I identify as white despite being mixed) but that conversation still really rubbed me the wrong way, because what people were really trying to do is poo poo on the establishment, not make good faith points about racism in the party. Okay sorry for explaining something you were already aware of, it came across as if you were denying that was a thing. But as to his specific comments... This was how the conversation went Condiv posted:like, there were thinkpieces being written all the time asking if ellison was really who we needed to appeal to voters in this new age of trumpism thanks to him being a black muslim. Fulchrum posted:If it's about maintaining a lily white hegemony as ranted and raved above, why is Perez any more acceptable than Ellison? Condiv posted:not really. they used racism against the black candidate to install the whiter candidate. just like they smeared the jewish guy as racist and sexist so that a white woman could beat him. He may be wrong - but I don't get the feeling he's arguing in bad faith, and he was arguing with someone who is currently, in this thread, slurring Ellison's based on his being a muslim. I'm not 100% sure I'm down with the whole "Call anti-muslim bigotry racism" thing, but I completely believe there was anti-Muslim bigotry at work in this nomination fight (made clear by actual things said be actual people within the party who had a role in the fight - not just low level supporters but prominent figures and members of the media) and if we're calling that racism then I think this was an honest attempt to criticize the party for racism - or as close as you can get within the context of "arguing with Fulchrum", who I am pretty sure totally lacks the ability to argue in good faith himself. The fact that the Democrats tolerate this sort of bullshit to the extent they do, whenever it happens to align against a political opponent, is not cool. Because as I'm sure you aware, that's another really common thing for racism - for it to be used as a tool. It's possible to be racist in your arguments against one minority while supporting another, and that absolutely happened here more than once. (again, I don't think this nomination turned on it despite it being close, but in a way that makes it even worse - it felt like completely gratuitous and unneeded anti-muslim animosity, and it doesn't reflect well on the party) GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/755912156978216960/KuGkNWIH.jpg Stop talking about Perez if hes white enogh. Hes a clintonite.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
Thinking about it a bit more, I just realized where the different readings of Condiv's comment might have come from. I might be wrong here. I did not initially get the sense that Perez was being included in the "lily white people controlling the party" being maligned. He's certainly not the sort of person my mind immediately jumped to based on that phrasing. I can see how you might have read that in a way that looks really bad, and hell that might have been the way he intended it. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Condiv said Perez was "whiter" and I could sense that people were gonna interpret that as racism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Thinking about it a bit more, I just realized where the different readings of Condiv's comment might have come from. I might be wrong here. Condiv posted:i'm glad the leadership of the DNC is finally not lily-white a few months after they really needed PoC leading. there's still alot of other leadership positions that are held by white people. let's keep replacing them till we are at a much more representative population imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
It's somewhat counterproductive to focus on whiteness here. Perez (a minority) was recruited by people close to Obama (another minority), specifically to prevent Ellison (a minority) from getting control of the DNC as part of 'The Sanders wing'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Let me defend Chelsea's comments here because they are important going forward, both politically and policy wise: This is very different from the politics we saw, which were Clinton supporting not 'basically Medicare' but 'Obacamare +'. Problem with that, of course, is that people don't like Obamacare a whole lot. The main problem with Clinton's campaign, politically (if maybe not policy-wise), is that it was calibrated under the notion that people approved of the status quo a certain amount. They didn't. The minimum wage thing is the best example of that. Pedro De Heredia fucked around with this message at 12:26 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:This is very different from the politics we saw, which were Clinton supporting not 'basically Medicare' but 'Obacamare +'. Another problem is the Obamacare + wasn't much of an upgrade to Obamacare. The center was totally unwilling to address the issues with Obamacare in a realistic fashion cause they were more devoted to the lie that it's perfect than to helping people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:26
|
|
|
Paolomania posted:New thread title: "Will the Democrats ever stop punching left?" I'm still very partial to "If the Democrats aren't persecuting me, why do I keep loudly insisting they are?". Or "Persecution complex whining - Leftist edition."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 12:42
|
|
|
Condiv posted:Another problem is the Obamacare + wasn't much of an upgrade to Obamacare. The center was totally unwilling to address the issues with Obamacare in a realistic fashion cause they were more devoted to the lie that it's perfect than to helping people. I think it was more that they didn't feel like doing the performative waste of time that proposing a DOA improvement would be, whereas Republicans had no problem pushing a DOA plan as a PR strategy. I think they need to adopt a more full-throated strategy of legislation as PR here e: like hand the Democrats both houses of Congress and the Presidency and I'm sure they'd be trying to move legislation. They can't now, but they really should be talking about an actual plan
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I think it was more that they didn't feel like doing the performative waste of time that proposing a DOA improvement would be, whereas Republicans had no problem pushing a DOA plan as a PR strategy. I think they need to adopt a more full-throated strategy of legislation as PR here We did that once and the dems proceeded to do absolutely nothing worthwhile Also, the republican bill was DOA cause they never really had one and threw something together at the last minute. Meanwhile their agitation seems to have got them the power you say dems need to pass poo poo. Maybe dems should put forth some effort and they'll find themselves in power again Edit: speaking of the dems in 08, why wasn't Lieberman stripped of his committee positions for blocking ppaca? Condiv fucked around with this message at 14:40 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
Condiv posted:We did that once and the dems proceeded to do absolutely nothing worthwhile Excuse me but they did something worthwhile, they stabilized the bonuses and income of billionaires and centimillionaires  That's pretty worthwhile
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:
Because he'd probably filibuster in revenge at best, leave the caucus entirely at worst, which shows how tenuous the majority was
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Because he'd probably filibuster in revenge at best, leave the caucus entirely at worst, which shows how tenuous the majority was He did both anyway  And we let him hang on to his chairmanship till he got replaced by a republican Why didn't they threaten his chairmanship to whip him into line?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
Condiv posted:He did both anyway Ever tried whipping someone without a spine?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Condiv posted:He did both anyway Progressive CT dems tried to primary Lieberman but somehow he was seen as too essential to oppose from above so it was almost always without institutional support. Rewarding bad dems is a tradition at this point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
LOL progressive Dems successfully primaried Lieberman and then Lieberman ran as an independent and beat the progressive dem in the general.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:LOL progressive Dems successfully primaried Lieberman and then Lieberman ran as an independent and beat the progressive dem in the general. Why are you happy about that? I thought you were a progressive yourself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Why are you happy about that? I thought you were a progressive yourself. Well, they didn't split the vote and cause the R to win, so it could have been worse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Well, they didn't split the vote and cause the R to win, so it could have been worse. Yeah, but just barely. Lieberman was terrible before the primary, and even worse afterwards. I can't think of a better example of how worthless a blue dog Dem can be. I still have affection for Barack Obama, even though he disappointed me more than a few times as President, and a lot of the blame for tarnishing his legacy has to come down to Lieberman loving him on the ACA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:LOL progressive Dems successfully primaried Lieberman and then Lieberman ran as an independent and beat the progressive dem in the general. you're a lieberman fan JC? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:49
|
|