|
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:Putin is an enemy of the left and as a European leftist this should be really loving obvious to you. holy gently caress you're actually dumber than i thought 
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Putin is an enemy of the left and as a European leftist this should be really loving obvious to you. Don't try to blame your own sins on Putin. Be a loving adult and admit you hosed up and you played a gambit against the progressives which failed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:y'all sticking your heads in the sand. You are the only one doing this by repeatedly insisting any split in the party was Russian doing. And again I'll point to the 2008 primary and her team's shenanigans then to say HILLARY DOES NOT NEED HELP ALIENATING VOTERS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:Yeah, it didn't have to be THE RUSSIANS!!!1!! necessarily, but there was an obvious coordinated effort to discredit Bernie supporters. Could've been Trumpers. I bought it, because those accounts were active in pro-Bernie discussions, not just harassment. My interpretation doesn't require either of those. All it requires is @trumpfan69 tweeting "fuk u bitch $hillary is corrupt as poo poo" at a thinkpiece author who then goes "oh my a Bernie Bro, I have heard of these villains  " and pens an op-ed about the harrowing experience they have just endured
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:I'm not sure how this analogy is supposed to work. The concept of Bernie bro came around to question the credibility of progressives as liberals, and evolved through its various iterations as centrists responded to more and more cleavages in the party becoming apparent. It was an obvious effort to disenfranchise a part of the party electorate through shaming, and turn the rest against them. So in this analogy the the centrists tried to kick the progressive roommate out of the house by rhetorically destroying his claim to sharing the house.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Apparently the cunning Ivan employed his oriental wiles to force poor Hillary and her campaign to eagerly run with a full-blown smear campaign. Happens to the best of us, really.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:
When did this happen? I honestly recall both campaigns being fairly clean.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:The concept of Bernie bro came around to question the credibility of progressives as liberals, and evolved through its various iterations as centrists responded to more and more cleavages in the party becoming apparent. It was an obvious effort disenfranchise a part of the party electorate through shaming. Who tried to kick you out of a house? There was a primary, bernie lost. Then most of us moved on. We established that most bernie supporters went to clinton, we havent established who the rest were or why they didn't, though we can guess, or where they were or who they voted for. No one tried to kick anyone out of the party, as far as I know. parallelodad posted:When did this happen? I honestly recall both campaigns being fairly clean. I think a lot of "people on this social media i use" is being blown up into "the hillary/bernie wing of the party..."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
loquacius posted:My interpretation doesn't require either of those. All it requires is @trumpfan69 tweeting "fuk u bitch $hillary is corrupt as poo poo" at a thinkpiece author who then goes "oh my a Bernie Bro, I have heard of these villains Yeah, it's not that. I had a close friend who got hit with a ton of poo poo, and it was very clearly from "Bernie supporters". And most of her block list disappeared after the election. Leah McElrath might not have been quite as careful about cataloging who they claimed to support, but she had the same thing to a much, much, much larger degree (like 3,000 accounts up and vanished after the election).
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
parallelodad posted:When did this happen? I honestly recall both campaigns being fairly clean. Try saying "I support Bernie Sanders" in D&D in May 2016 and see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Who tried to kick you out of a house? There was a primary, bernie lost. Then most of us moved on. We established that most bernie supporters went to clinton, we havent established who the rest were or why they didn't, though we can guess, or where they were or who they voted for. No one tried to kick anyone out of the party, as far as I know. lol the Clintonistas were yelling about how they didn't need any leftist votes up until november 8th.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Don't try to blame your own sins on Putin. Be a loving adult and admit you hosed up and you played a gambit against the progressives which failed. So Putin isn't engaged in a concerted effort to promote reactionary right wing governments across Europe? Are those all conspiracies too? Fiction posted:JeffersonClay was a perfect example of how insufferably smug Hillary supporters were about her chances of winning all the way up until the election. Now it's the leftists' fault for not believing it was the Russians all along, a convenient blanket excuse for the Democrats doing everything in their power to not have to listen to their constituents. Yes, I was confident Hillary was going to win. So was nearly everyone else. I don't know how you're making this crazy connection between "Russians hosed with our coalition" and "Democrats don't need to listen to their constituents" but I guess that's par for the thread. Ignore what all the democrats can see if you want, but that won't help your views become any more relevant to us. loquacius posted:Try saying "I support Bernie Sanders" in D&D in May 2016 and see what happens. Probably something like "he can't win get over it"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Try saying "I support Bernie Sanders" in D&D in May 2016 and see what happens. I did. I was basically patted on the head and told how precious I was.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
loquacius posted:Try saying "I support Bernie Sanders" in D&D in May 2016 and see what happens. Nevvy Z posted:I think a lot of "people on this social media i use" is being blown up into "the hillary/bernie wing of the party..." Cerebral Bore posted:lol the Clintonistas were yelling about how they didn't need any leftist votes up until november 8th. They didn't. They needed rustbelt votes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Who tried to kick you out of a house? There was a primary, bernie lost. Then most of us moved on. We established that most bernie supporters went to clinton, we havent established who the rest were or why they didn't, though we can guess, or where they were or who they voted for. No one tried to kick anyone out of the party, as far as I know. If Hill Folk get to blame "Bernie Bros" for the ills of the party, it's only fair to remind people that Hill Folk told Sanders supporters they didn't need their votes, smugly and often.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So Putin isn't engaged in a concerted effort to promote reactionary right wing governments across Europe? Are those all conspiracies too? It's a conspiracy to think that the only reason your beloved queen lost is because of Putin's efforts to destabilize the West. He may be doing that, but to think it's the reason for anything that happened this year is completely foolish. That sort of disinformation campaign can only inflame rifts that already exist, and boy howdy was there a big one last year that Hillary handled very poorly!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:If Hill Folk get to blame "Bernie Bros" for the ills of the party, it's only fair to remind people that Hill Folk told Sanders supporters they didn't need their votes, smugly and often. They didn't. Fiction posted:It's a conspiracy to think that the only reason your beloved queen lost is because of Putin's efforts to destabilize the West. He may be doing that, but to think it's the reason for anything that happened this year is completely foolish. That sort of disinformation campaign can only inflame rifts that already exist, and boy howdy was there a big one last year that Hillary handled very poorly! JC has acknowledged Hillary's faults many many times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:They didn't. Clearly, as President Clinton has illustrated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Probably something like "he can't win get over it" Take this and add in a lot of Just Asking Questions about my personal privilege level, treatment of women, good intentions for the American government, opinion of Donald Trump, number of pussies grabbed, etc, plus some enraged screeching from Fulchrum and some generalized pretentiousness, my point is I assure you the bad blood was there
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:JC has acknowledged Hillary's faults many many times. Never in any way that would inform future policy. He's already retreated to Russian trickery as a better excuse for his purposes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Who tried to kick you out of a house? There was a primary, bernie lost. Then most of us moved on. We established that most bernie supporters went to clinton, we havent established who the rest were or why they didn't, though we can guess, or where they were or who they voted for. No one tried to kick anyone out of the party, as far as I know. If the moral panic ended with the primaries, if the moral panic hadn't bee whipped up at all, if the centrists hadn't proceeded to just affirm their hegemony in party institutions, if they hadn't acted like they were the victims of some grave injustice, if they had paid at least a lip service to the value of progressives within the party.... instead of the incredible arrogance and crushing of internal opposition in the bud (stopping only precariously shy of actual strongarming of progressives out of the party), maybe there would today be a bit of trust between the two sides.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Clearly, as President Clinton has illustrated. Most Bernie voters voted for Hilary. This is settled. The key states she lost weren't because of Sanders supporters. steinrokkan posted:If the moral panic ended with the primaries, if the moral panic hadn't bee whipped up at all, if the centrists hadn't proceeded to just affirm their hegemony in party institutions, if they hadn't acted like they were the victims of some grave injustice, if they had paid at least a lip service to the value of progressives within the party.... instead of the incredible arrogance and crushing of internal opposition in the bud (stopping only precariously shy of actual strongarming of progressives out of the party), maybe there would today be a bit of trust between the two sides. Or maybe you are projecting your feud with a poster you don't like onto our entire party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Fiction posted:It's a conspiracy to think that the only reason your beloved queen lost is because of Putin's efforts to destabilize the West. He may be doing that, but to think it's the reason for anything that happened this year is completely foolish. That sort of disinformation campaign can only inflame rifts that already exist, and boy howdy was there a big one last year that Hillary handled very poorly! Who's saying "the only thing that mattered this election was Russian interference?" I see a bunch of people in this thread asserting that it didn't matter, or that it's a crazy conspiracy theory, and they're wrong. Every coalition has existing rifts that can be exploited. That doesn't diminish the act of exploiting them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Most Bernie voters voted for Hilary. This is settled. The key states she lost weren't because of Sanders supporters. psssst in an election determined by less than 100K votes, she really needed every possible vote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:They didn't. They needed rustbelt votes. Again, whether they needed them, and whether they spurned them in a fit of egoistic madness are two entirely different things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:psssst in an election determined by less than 100K votes, she really needed every possible vote. Really? Like those 3 million votes she got more than donald? I think where the votes are matters a lot more, personally. steinrokkan posted:Again, whether they needed them, and whether they spurned them in a fit of egoistic madness are two entirely different things. Are we talking about how rust belt votes were treated or how you felt you were treated?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
SO can anyone tell me if Hillary's campaign had RUssian operatives in it so to as explain why she spent so much time at fundraisers rather then ccampaigning?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:What I'm trying to say is Bernie Sanders is a Russian agent sent in to sow chaos and disorder amongst the Democratic Party
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Are we talking about how rust belt votes were treated or how you felt you were treated? Are you saying rust belt states were treated intelligently and with as much gravitas as they deserved by the HRC campaign?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:What if Bernie Sanders is a secret Russian and he's posting on these dead gay comedy forums under the pseudonym JeffersonClay? What if this whole feud you have with him is stupid as gently caress? steinrokkan posted:Are you saying rust belt states were treated intelligently and with as much gravitas as they deserved by the HRC campaign? No. I'm saying that Bernie voters who didn't go to Clinton didn't matter at all regarding the final outcome. context matters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Really? Like those 3 million votes she got more than donald? I think where the votes are matters a lot more, personally. frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Clearly, as President Clinton has illustrated. Nevvy Z posted:No. I'm saying that Bernie voters who didn't go to Clinton didn't matter at all regarding the final outcome. context matters. Oh boy, I'd sure love to see your data here
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:If Hill Folk get to blame "Bernie Bros" for the ills of the party, it's only fair to remind people that Hill Folk told Sanders supporters they didn't need their votes, smugly and often. frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Oh boy, I'd sure love to see your data here Well, I'd actually put the onus anus  on you to show where Bernie supporters in those states would have made the difference, since you are trying to suggest that she did need the small portion of sanders supporters who didn't go for her. I declared some things "unestablished" but if you have evidence to the contrary, by all means...
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Well, I'd actually put the onus anus Here's my evidence. Hillary Clinton lost the election by a very statistically small margin and Sanders supporters clearly were at least some of those people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Maybe the bigger problem, which the Clintonista attitude towards Bernie supporters is indictive of, is that you're not supposed to be gripped by hubris to such a degree that you start to write off entire voting blocs as unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Here's my evidence. Hillary Clinton lost the election by a very statistically small margin and Sanders supporters clearly were at least some of those people. Oh well, I'm sure convinced. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Oh well, I'm sure convinced. Who gives a poo poo if you're convinced? You're clearly a loving idiot to have lost the election and STILL try to claim the moral high ground that you didn't need more voters. Protip: Clinton lost because she didn't get enough votes to win the electoral colelge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Fiction posted:There was no "ratfuck." There's been a time-honored tradition since 2008 of Clinton and her supporters creating yawning rifts in the party solely by their own hubris and selfishness. This time it was just fatal to her. I think you'll find this sort of thing is a time-honored tradition of the DNC going back to at least 1944, if not further. Clinton is just another example in a long string of examples where the centrists sabotage the left to the detriment of their own party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
frakeaing HAMSTER DANCE posted:Who gives a poo poo if you're convinced? You're clearly a loving idiot to have lost the election and STILL try to claim the moral high ground that you didn't need more voters. I didn't lose the election. I'm not trying to claim a moral highground. I'm not sure why you are mad at me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:lol the Clintonistas were yelling about how they didn't need any leftist votes up until november 8th. "If you don't like Clinton, then don't vote for her. Have a nice day."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:I didn't lose the election. I'm not trying to claim a moral highground. I'm not sure why you are mad at me. Sorry, the side you're playing Dipshit's Advocate for or whatever. You're claiming she didn't need more votes. She clearly, demonstrably did. That's a real stupid position to take.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:16
|
|