|
Groovelord Neato posted:if sanders had the campaign apparatus he had by the end from the get-go he would've beat hillary. you gotta remember he kinda did it as a protest run and had the most bare bones poo poo and no name recognition and still got that close. You're not going to get better name recognition any time soon, even if Bernie was up to running in 2020 (he's not) he's basically a Nader now. Who's left, Warren? There actually is a dearth of democratic populists who could stand for election nationally. You're not going to get a different nomination system within the party, if you can't play the game and can't force a rewrite of the rules you're just going to keep losing. The party's a business dedicated to funneling billions of dollars in favors and subsidies to for-profit interests in exchange for political support, most of its influential players make an incredibly plush living off of the Democratic Party remaining exactly as it is; nobody employed by it or whose mistaken its mission statement for their personal ideals is going to just give you the nom because you're so righteous. I think there's enough of a foundation for an economic leftist movement to form generally within the US, but it's wishful thinking to imagine that the Democratic Party is going to ever hand over the keys to some faction that holds no influence within it and fundamentally does not reflect its values and doesn't have the will or the critical mass to pull a Tea Party. You'll probably wind up happier in four years if you spent your monday night quarterbacking energy getting the Pansexual Peace Party in the town council. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 22:48 on May 2, 2017 |
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:that's the nuttiest thing about us. you'll have conservatives crying about the commie dems when the democrats now are just 60s republicans (maybe even further right honestly). Yeah, more like 80s Republicans
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Disband the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:in the strictest sense she's right that without comey and wikileaks she wins but that's like the pats losing to the jaguars and blaming it on the refs loving up a late call. it shouldn't have been close enough to matter. This. Trump's margin of victory wasn't really that much all things considered. If those things hadn't happened or if her campaign had made a single correct decision at any point in the process it's very possible that we'd be looking at a different outcome. It would still be pretty narrow, which is also insane but there you go.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Nut to Butt posted:Disband the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:they don't. I agree but then that means the whole thing falls apart because you'll have a significant number of people in the country, among them PoC's, that have fundamental problems with it
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS YAAAAS
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:in the strictest sense she's right that without comey and wikileaks she wins Hmm I dunno about that. She had everything one could possibly need to surf into the Whitehouse. And yet, she was barely keeping her head above water, almost as if all the privilege and preference in the world can only carry someone so far...
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:This. Had the Dems run a candidate that drummed up the support of their base, had a similar pull on the youth vote as Obama, and had populist support throughout the rust belt they would have resoundingly won, too bad there was no one like that
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
it sucks so hard we could've had an actual good president for once. he woulda got jack poo poo done due to the republicans going completely off the deep end but he still woulda been there.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
I never cared for the "lesser of two evils" argument. The whole election was so vile and people are acting as though the two evils don't have any control of how evil they are. They could have improved by degrees or magnitudes, but they didn't. The DNC didn't fail *us* because it no longer serves *us*. Essentially the only things they are leftist on are bullshit non-issues that don't matter to serious people, which they use as distractions so we don't clamor for free healthcare, better schools and higher wages. At least they're (ostensibly) pro-choice. That's about it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
phasmid posted:I never cared for the "lesser of two evils" argument. The whole election was so vile and people are acting as though the two evils don't have any control of how evil they are. They could have improved by degrees or magnitudes, but they didn't. The DNC didn't fail *us* because it no longer serves *us*. if public opinion was 51% in favor of repealing Roe vs Wade the DNC would fall over themselves to get rid of it, and if you think otherwise I just don't know what to say
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
FPTP basically forces a "Lesser of Two Evils" approach though. To kill that approach we'd probably need to go to some kind of Instant runoff voting where you can rank your choices and your vote transfers accordingly, which I'll go on record as thinking is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
phasmid posted:Essentially the only things they are leftist on are bullshit non-issues that don't matter to serious people, which they use as distractions so we don't clamor for free healthcare, better schools and higher wages. This is the real problem and there's no way to fix it
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:if public opinion was 51% in favor of repealing Roe vs Wade the DNC would fall over themselves to get rid of it, and if you think otherwise I just don't know what to say The most obvious display of this would be Obama, and Clinton, suddenly deciding gays are cool and good after literal decades of saying "gently caress you" to them.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:This is the real problem and there's no way to fix it Get rid of all white people.  D&D has real solutions.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:The most obvious display of this would be Obama, and Clinton, suddenly deciding gays are cool and good after literal decades of saying "gently caress you" to them. It was because of Joe Biden
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:It was because of Joe Biden Didn't even know he was gay
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:One of the networks, CNN I think, said on air that it was illegal to view them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DcATG9Qy_A
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
drat I wanted to know what CNN found in those emails
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Yea that's the one, smh
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
rofl I just saw this one too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mY_CqDA_qU
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:Didn't even know he was gay Closet case. Vice President Joe Biden really did get ahead of President Barack Obama on accepting gay marriage in 2012 — and the White House really wasn’t happy about it, despite the two leaders’ many attempts to claim otherwise. That’s the story laid out in Jo Becker’s new book, “Forcing the Spring,” which documents the past few years of successful efforts to expand the legalization of gay marriage, according to an advance copy obtained by POLITICO. Speculation that Biden’s comments on “Meet the Press” in May 2012 were meant as a trial balloon, Becker writes, came from people “not privy to the chaos that erupted inside the West Wing after an emailed transcript of the interview landed in the inbox of the White House press team.” A furious Valerie Jarrett, Becker adds, accused Biden of “downright disloyalty.” Becker describes the months leading up to that rushed moment as a scramble to weigh the political dangers of backing gay marriage against the expected push to add marriage equality to the Democratic convention platform. And Becker says Obama senior adviser David Plouffe reached out to an unexpected ally: former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman, who came out as gay himself in 2010.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
LOL "Its different for the media"
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
CassandraZara posted:rofl I just saw this one too Lol jfc
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
this was dozens of pages ago but that i never understood lizard-people-politician conspiracies until i saw that "pokemon goOoOo to the polls !!!!" video hillary is like a goddamn yuan-ti
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
CharlestonJew posted:She's going to run again, holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
CharlsestonJew posted:She's going to
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
Tangentially related, but Debbie Wasserman-Schulz was just on CNN defending Obama over his $400k Wall Street speech. If anyone was under the impression that establishment Democrats will actually learn anything from the 2016 election, well...
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
phasmid posted:I never cared for the "lesser of two evils" argument. The whole election was so vile and people are acting as though the two evils don't have any control of how evil they are. They could have improved by degrees or magnitudes, but they didn't. The DNC didn't fail *us* because it no longer serves *us*. it's so there's a constant source of stem cells for anti aging research/treatment
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
NoEyedSquareGuy posted:Tangentially related, but Debbie Wasserman-Schulz was just on CNN defending Obama over his $400k Wall Street speech. If anyone was under the impression that establishment Democrats will actually learn anything from the 2016 election, well... Of course she did, she is a huge piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:Of course she did, she is a huge piece of poo poo She blocked payday loan regulation in Florida.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
They needed to throw her rear end under the bus after the election. Call her out for not doing any one of the things that could have gotten her the .5% or less needed to loving win such as : -Campaigning more often in key rural locations instead of doing her victory laps in liberal strongholds with tons of celebrities. I'm sure lots of people with heavy mortgages or debt were going "man this Hillary has my vote since she's spending her time yupping it up with Beyonce and Jay Z while Trump personally visits a bunch of the places hurting the most." -Voluntarily releasing her Wall Street Transcripts early on instead of waiting for them to leak and actually cause problems during the debates. You knew wikileaks was on your loving rear end and you still refused to preempt them. -NOT loving GETTING PAID 270 GRAND A SPEECH BY WALLSTREET WHILE YOU HAVE PLANS FOR RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. -Not calling half of your opponent's supporters deplorable. Even changing it to like "1% of Donald Trump's supporters are deplorable" instead of quote:"To just be grossly generalistic, you can put half of Trump supporters (lovely WIZARD NOTE - IT IS NOT GOOD POLITICS TO POTENTIALLY 25% OF THE COUNTRY DEPLORABLE PEOPLE YOU DUMB loving RETARD, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE MAJORITY OF TRUMP SUPPORTERS WILL ASSUME YOU'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT THEM) into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it. -Not choosing to say you're going to put coal country out of business. Unless you're mentioning before and after IN THE SAME BREATH that you'll retrain them and guarantee jobs. And even then, don't loving phrase it as putting coal country out of business you dumb gently caress. -Choosing anyone but Kaine, but I guess you owed him for stepping down from the DNC and putting DWS in. Not doing the whole DWS thing would have helped out, but she couldn't know that Joe Biden's son would get cancer so she had to play it safe. Any ONE of those things would have been enough to win, but she was either too proud or too stupid to do a single one. As a democrat who voted Trump, I have zero regrets still. They couldn't pass jackshit without watering it down to nothing even if it 434 House Representatives and 99 Senators to 1 republican in each. Shitty Wizard fucked around with this message at 00:57 on May 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
Hillary? She's bad. Bernie? He would have won.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:Hillary? She's bad.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:Hillary? She's bad. Facts
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
I mean Bernie woulda been a lame duck but good god he was better than Trump or Hillary
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Even just choosing Bernie as VP could have won it for her. What possible leverage could Kaine have to keep her from breaking their agreement? Bernie very likely would have won, but if she made even one of many token gestures or fixed one of many obvious flaws instead of trying to turn Texas blue or whatever dumb poo poo they were trying, she might have managed to win.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
I get why not Hillary, but why Trump?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
JB50 posted:LOL "Its different for the media" the media has a very specific job
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 01:17
|
|