|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
shrike82 posted:I voted for Abuela not expecting the Sanders voters to blow up the country so good job digging through my post before election day? You wasted your vote, Trump won.  VitalSigns posted:Yeah click shrike82's his little '?' He was trolling Clinton supporters earlier in this very thread, now I guess he got bored so he flipped. awww I thought my post was good too Homeless Friend fucked around with this message at 06:51 on May 4, 2017 |
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
Taintrunner posted:With Democrats like these, who needs Republicans?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
The whole faithless elector thing was so ridiculously dumb. The legislative branch has multiple ways to go "lol get hosed" if there are electoral vote irregularities.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:You wasted your vote, Trump won. I've learnt my lesson and am voting third party in 2020!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
Trump is going to be re-elected in 2020 in a landslide.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:Trump is going to be re-elected in 2020 in a landslide. I believe it
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:Trump is going to be re-elected in 2020 in a landslide. Oh, is hillary running again?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:18
|
|
|
ISIS CURES TROONS posted:Trump is going to be re-elected in 2020 in a landslide. I seriously get the feeling that anyone who would be considered a dem heavyweight for 2024 is going to run away screaming at the suggestion that they should take one for the team like Kerry. This Cassandra-esque realization is profoundly horrifying.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 07:47
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:But good that you can claim that you're ideologically pure while Trump continues to trample over minorities. Yes, Hillary and her supporters do carry some of the moral blame for Trump's outrages. She lost a winnable campaign to him and they supported her heedlessly as she did so, despite very strong evidence indicating that Sanders had a better chance of beating Trump. shrike82 posted:We're seeing the exact same white leftist accelerationism play out in France with white leftists literally saying there's no difference between Le Pen and Macron. Only someone without any ties to immigrant, ethnic minorities can say. I get you're just doing some lame trolling performance here but this is factually wrong. Melenchon won the Muslim vote, not the soulless Gallic he-Hillary who's going mano-a-mano with Mme. Donald. And there's absolutely no sign they're going to rush in to save Macron.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 10:17
|
|
|
I didn't realize the Muslims have approved a vote for Le Pen over Macron but thanks for speaking for them. And TIC, given your consistent racism about Arab/Muslim malice in any Israeli-Palestine thread, I'm not surprised you're pushing for Le Pen.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
Hey TIC since you're here I'm curious: why are you the biggest Bernie supporter in this thread but whenever I pop into UK politics you're hating on Corbyn like you want to gargle Tony Blair's balls. This is not a gotcha I'm just genuinely wanting to know because I can't figure out if you're a progressive or not. Is there something quirky about Corbyn like he's not a big Israel booster or, oh my God that's probably it isn't it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 11:37
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Not really, the likelihood that a candidate less hated than Clinton could have eked out a win on a Obama's-third-term-but-even-less-popular platform, with another 4 years of an obstructionist congress, unable to pass anything but the social security and medicare cuts you want, while the Democrats continue to bleed support and lose state-level races, is not exactly an auspicious sign for your ideology. Yeah I don't really see alternate universe President Hillary doing much more than kicking the can down the road four years since the obstruction would have continued and we'd just be in the same place as we are now if not worse (although a much better SCOTUS would have protected us from it a little; even if they continues to block Hillary's nominations it would be preferable to what we ended up with). The DNC would have considered a narrow victory against Trump an endorsement instead of the terrifying message that they squeezed out a victory based on the loathsomeness of their opponent and everything is fine. This country is in a really, really bad spot right now since a large amount of the population is driven entirely by hatred of the other to their own detriment and the terrible system we set up 200 years ago is falling apart at the seams under it's own undemocratic nature. It's really depressing. Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 13:01 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 12:59
|
|
|
Radish posted:Yeah I don't really see alternate universe President Hillary doing much more than kicking the can down the road four years since the obstruction would have continued and we'd just be in the same place as we are now if not worse (although a much better SCOTUS would have protected us from it a little; even if they continues to block Hillary's nominations it would be preferable to what we ended up with). The DNC would have considered a narrow victory against Trump an endorsement instead of the terrifying message that they squeezed out a victory based on the loathsomeness of their opponent and everything is fine. This country is in a really, really bad spot right now since a large amount of the population is driven entirely by hatred of the other to their own detriment and the terrible system we set up 200 years ago is falling apart at the seams under it's own undemocratic nature. It's really depressing. She would've driven republicans crazy by signing a bipartisan social security privatization bill
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
Condiv posted:She would've driven republicans crazy The trick is to compromise harder. Reeeeeally dig your heels in waaaay across that isle to plant your firm, centrist agenda.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
I still wish Hillary or gently caress anyone else had won because oh my God Trump. I was just responding to the assertion that because Biden might have won that it means that everything is fine and we don't have to ask why the Democratic party suffered colossal losses at every level of government for the last eight years. The Presidency is not the be all and end all of American politics.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
obama should have won
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 14:30
|
|
L
|
shrike82 posted:Lower than hated centrists Obama and his wife. Obama isn't widely perceived as a neoliberal, halfwit. JeffersonClay posted:And that's why it wasn't about wall street or neoliberalism, because Diamond Joe's record is worse than Clinton's on both. Wrong. Clinton was marketed as a partner in her husband's administration. Like it or not, fairly or unfairly, Hillary Clinton's record includes all the deregulation, all the badly-negotiated free trade agreements, and all the factory closures of the 90's.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
I mean Biden's bankruptcy bill was really, really, really bad though, and that was his baby
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I mean Biden's bankruptcy bill was really, really, really bad though, and that was his baby It was, and in a fair world, he'd be more tarred with perceptions of neoliberalism than Hillary. But perception is reality. The name "Clinton" has become a byword for deregulation, deindustrialization, triangulation, and the rest. I wish it hadn't been; I'd have liked to have seen the Democrats win big last year. VitalSigns posted:I still wish Hillary or gently caress anyone else had won because oh my God Trump. Exactly. Eking out presidential victories is not enough, and the last eight years should have been proof of that for the Dems. The fact that JC et al. so obstinately refuse to learn this lesson is 
Majorian fucked around with this message at 16:50 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It was, and in a fair world, he'd be more tarred with perceptions of neoliberalism than Hillary. But perception is reality. The name "Clinton" has become a byword for deregulation, deindustrialization, triangulation, and the rest. I wish it hadn't been; I'd have liked to have seen the Democrats win big last year. fair enough
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Yes, Hillary and her supporters do carry some of the moral blame for Trump's outrages. She lost a winnable campaign to him and they supported her heedlessly as she did so, despite very strong evidence indicating that Sanders had a better chance of beating Trump. There was also the whole pied piper strategy that her team was responsible for, though it's highly debatable how much effect that actually had in helping Trump win his primary. Still, it plays to a mindset that was completely willing to play chicken with the good of the nation they supposedly wanted to lead, which carries some moral blame as well.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
tekz posted:He's loving garbage. you would have a beer with him so he's the best candidate
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Typo posted:you would have a beer with him so he's the best candidate Barney Gumble/Norm Peterson 2020
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I love that you're weaselling into arguing that you don't have to vote against the fascist. get this ahistorical bullshit outta here
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I mean Biden's bankruptcy bill was really, really, really bad though, and that was his baby Joe Biden is extremely well connected to the financial industry and every accusation made against hillary can be made against him with the exception of EMAILS but it doesn't matter nearly as much because joe biden seems like a nice guy who can relate to a white working class guy from PA whereas hillary can't pour a beer properly
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Wrong. Clinton was marketed as a partner in her husband's administration. Like it or not, fairly or unfairly, Hillary Clinton's record includes all the deregulation, all the badly-negotiated free trade agreements, and all the factory closures of the 90's. Bill Clinton is extremely popular, though. If his administration is irrevocably tainted with neoliberalism, then people must like neoliberalism. Or do you think the electorate only holds his wife responsible for his administration's failings?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Typo posted:Joe Biden is extremely well connected to the financial industry and every accusation made against hillary can be made against him with the exception of EMAILS Also, his family's history is so thoroughly tragic that it's hard not to be at least a little sympathetic for him in spite of everything.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Bill Clinton is extremely popular, though. If his administration is irrevocably tainted with neoliberalism, then people must like neoliberalism. Or do you think the electorate only holds his wife responsible for his administration's failings? Shockingly enough laws and treaties can persist for longer than one presidential administration, and the effects of them may be different at times dependent on political and economic circumstances. I know that you're just doing this as part of your half-year-long project of insisting that you're not owned, but when people have to explain babby's first civics to you it's time to take a step back and rethink your approach.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Bill Clinton is extremely popular, though. If his administration is irrevocably tainted with neoliberalism, then people must like neoliberalism. Or do you think the electorate only holds his wife responsible for his administration's failings? That's one way to look at it. Another way would be to say that from a policy standpoint, Hillary is basically Bill with a third the passion and none of the charisma. So, why is it that neoliberalism can't succeed by itself without a uniquely talented salesperson? How was Obama a reasonably popular, two term president who left office at nearly 70% approval, and yet the Democrats lost 900 seats in those 8 years? Moreover, how did this all lead to the most unpopular and generally loathed human being who has ever run for president gaining control of the most powerful military on earth? could there be something people don't like (gasp) about neoliberalism?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
To use the same argument, if leftism is so self-evidently popular, why can't it succeed by itself? Not just in the US but literally any country in the world. QED
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:That's one way to look at it. Another way would be to say that from a policy standpoint, Hillary is basically Bill with a third the passion and none of the charisma. So, why is it that neoliberalism can't succeed by itself without a uniquely talented salesperson? How was Obama a reasonably popular, two term president who left office at nearly 70% approval, and yet the Democrats lost 900 seats in those 8 years? Moreover, how did this all lead to the most unpopular and generally loathed human being who has ever run for president gaining control of the most powerful military on earth? Trump is very charismatic too, to a certain audience
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Trump is very charismatic too, to a certain audience And that charisma, plus the Democrats ceding economic populism (and thus a popular message) to him, are part of why he managed to eke out a win, against all odds, and in spite of his personal odiousness.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
I actually wonder, s charisma more important in an American election than say, a French election? Does it matter as much whether you would have a beer with macron or le pen as oppose to beer with clinton or trump?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Typo posted:I actually wonder, s charisma more important in an American election than say, a French election? It's an interesting question. I think what it comes down to, more than anything, is effectiveness in signaling that the candidate in question "cares" about the same poo poo that a target voting demographic does. Charisma is the basic ability to do this from instinct, but learning to signal effectively can still be learned, practiced, and honed. Now, whether or not that means a candidate in France needs to signal that they'e "a down-home, good ol' boy," whatever that means for France, to the same degree that an American candidate does, I don't know. I'd be interested to hear from someone who knows more about French elections.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It's an interesting question. I think what it comes down to, more than anything, is effectiveness in signaling that the candidate in question "cares" about the same poo poo that a target voting demographic does. Charisma is the basic ability to do this from instinct, but learning to signal effectively can still be learned, practiced, and honed. 8 years of Obama should prove that while charisma can get you elected, it can't help you enact policy or hold power in the medium to long run. Trump is certainly strengthening that argument on a daily basis.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:8 years of Obama should prove that while charisma can get you elected, it can't help you enact policy or hold power in the medium to long run. Trump is certainly strengthening that argument on a daily basis. Oh sure, but that's a distinction that I think deserves to be emphasized: the tools needed for getting elected are not the same as the tools needed for governing. Politics and policy are not synonymous.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Shockingly enough laws and treaties can persist for longer than one presidential administration, and the effects of them may be different at times dependent on political and economic circumstances. Bill is extremely popular today dumbshoes. It makes no sense that his neoliberalism would only impact the popularity of his wife.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I didn't realize Trump won the election with 80% of the vote. It's really too bad Bernie with the popularity of leftism in the country couldn't even win the primaries.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:45 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Bill is extremely popular today dumbshoes. It makes no sense that his neoliberalism would only impact the popularity of his wife. Bill Clinton also presided over a period of massive economic expansion, so people give him credit for that. They shouldn't, because it happened in spite of his bad policies, not because of them. Again, read Thomas Frank. Learn something. e: Also, again, national approval ratings don't mean poo poo. What matters are whether or not a candidate can get the electoral votes that they need. Your bad, bad strategy failed at this, and it will continue to fail. The Dems need those Rust Belt voters, and guess what? They loving hate the Clintons. Majorian fucked around with this message at 19:16 on May 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 19:13
|
|